Trading my Mazda CX-5 for a 2014 Subaru Forester XT

icarlos said:
It's not as bad when you drive around town but when we go on a long trip the car feels really heavy and engine becomes really busy when passing others or going up on highway hills. We are a family of 5 including a 60 pound dog and go on trips often and really need it a little more power. I'm 6'1 and weight 220 pounds...Maybe I need to lose weight lol!
Click to expand...

I've never felt down on power with my 2.0L AWD and I'm often on steep mountain pass highways. I'm not afraid to floor it when I need an extra boost of power but it's almost never necessary. I am 6-04" and 210 lbs. so I'm not a small person. Even loaded up with four adult men and all their gear I don't even need to floor it on the mountain passes so I don't understand all this talk of too little power. I have a Volvo sedan that makes 272 hp so I know the difference but I just don't see why anyone would need more power unless they were pulling a large trailer or driving over 10,000 feet.

I actually like winding the engine into the mid rpm band - it sounds/feels sweet.
 
I'm looking for a replacement for our 2007 Ford Freestyle (can't wait to get rid of it), and am thinking CX-5. This thread caught my eye, and I checked out the Forester, but as soon as I saw it was a CVT, I crossed it off the list. After the Ford CVT class action lawsuit, I'm pretty much deadset against CVTs. Maybe not fair to be so, but if something goes wrong with a CVT, you are out MAJOR bucks.
 
I'm new on this forum, and didn't read all 5 pages of this thread, so forgive me if I repeat anything that's been said.

Today I traded my '13 CX-5 GT for a '14 CX-5 GT. Before buying the '13, I had bought 4 NEW Subarus (2 Foresters, 2 Imprezas)...Subaru is a good car, BUT to "maintain" them is outrageous. When I bought a new Forester in '98 the 30K service was $256. The last Subaru I had the 30K service was $747, SAME dealer (60K service would also have been $747, or more.) Today EVERYTHING is more expensive on a Subaru....I traded for the CX-5 after the last 30K service on the Impreza. I told the Subaru dealer: "I don't think it should cost me more $ to maintain a Subaru Impreza, than a Mercedes."...Bottom line Subaru is a NICE car, but I personally believe Mazda's are nicer...and easier to maintain. I worked for a Mazda dealership for two years, that's how I fell in love with these cars. I won't even look at anything else now. I NEVER gave Mazda a second thought before, my bad!....I gotta go, I gotta go put some MILES on the new GT!:)
 
I drove the forester and found it awful. How a car handles is most important to me. The forester engineers reinvented vague steering and suspension, they made the perfect bore mobile.
 
I actually like the way the Forester looks a lot, but only in base trim. The vents on the XT are overkill to me. And the navigation is trash, even worse the. The CX-5. If the XT had the front end of the base model and it had a better navigations unit, it'd be a compelling choice.
 
I actually prefer the styling of the CX-5, Escape, Sportage and even the latest Rav4 over the Forester. I do admire the roominess and cargo carrying capacity of the Forester, but little else.
 
First, one of the busiest threads in subaruforester .org is "2011+ Excessive Oil Consumption? (merged thread)" (for the 2.5L).
Second, someone already mentioned that CX-5 has ~ 34/65 cubic feet of cargo/with seats down vs. Forester 31.5/68.5. Rear leg room is 39.3 vs. 38 and rear hip room is 54 vs 53.
 
I recently test drove a Forester XT, the one positive is the power once you switch it out if "intelligent" mode. The interior is a bit tacky with all the plasticky paddle shifters around the steering wheel, and the nav system is pretty bad. The ride is a bit jiggly, but that big sunroof and windows do make for great visibility. So overall not a bad package, but I still prefer the CX-5 in terms of looks (I know, it's subjective), better handling, and more linear power delivery (the Forester seemed hesistant in Intelligent mode).

As well, the Forester forums are full of horror stories with a bunch of XTs that don't start unto the third try, CVT issues, potential ECU issues, but at least Subaru seems to be responsive to some of these issues. So I would definitely not buy a Forester this year.
 
The subject of this thread is a little misleading given that the OP purchased another CX-5 after this.

I think a good summary to this thread is that the OP test drove a Forester XT and fell in love with the turbo power when accelerating at WOT but ended up changing his mind and buying a newer CX-5 instead of paying $37,000 for the Forester XT and having to use premium gas on it.
 
I have been considering a CX-5 or a Forester. As two of the posters above have opined, the Forester has a few issues. Aside from the oil issue which is a serious issue for some people, there seems to be a variety of other electrical issues. The CVT is questionable to many, considering the issues it has had in the Outbacks.
 
My wife and I test drove the Forrester and the Outback. We didn't even make it out of the dealer parking lot before saying the Forrester was a no go. No steering feel and did not like the transmission at all. Loving my 14 CX5 Touring with Tech.
 
From the Forester owner forum:

After reading all these horror stories about the '14 Forester I am glad I leased mine and will surely not buy it at the end of the lease term or get another Subaru. I am starting to believe what many told me before I leased mine, Subaru's are one step up from a Suzuki. For a few bucks more I could of leased a Mazda CX-5 with the 2.5 engine. Again, live and learn.
 
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
    • Like
    • Wow
Choices and thoughts on a 2024 CX-5 purchase
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
Antoine
Antoine
J
Goodbye CX-5 Sport. Hello Forester XT.
2
Replies
31
Views
8K
mox44ah
M
J
Considering purchasing a new CX-5
Replies
7
Views
7K
meow_man
M

Latest posts

Back