2013 CX-5 versus 2013 Impreza

Well I am in the market for a new car. I am a Mazda guy, but I like Subaru's too. I just sold my old 96 Protege after 8 years of daily driving.

The new 2012+ Impreza looks nice. A Fully loaded AWD one is just under $24,000 while the base model is $19,000. This is for the hatchback.
The new CX-5. Well you guys know the prices. $28,000+ for fully loaded model. Unfortunately no AWD option for manual transmission, which I want.

The CX-5 gets 1mpg worse. I am assuming it is better in deeper snow because of its higher ride height. Typically in my location the most snow we get is 6 inches, but in the past 20+ years I have lived here, we only had maybe 3 winters with over 10 inches of snow.

Both cars are anemic in power and pretty much have the same 0-60mph times. Both are known to be reliable brands. Both have nice sporty interiors and handling. Can anyone here justify the CX-5's higher price tag besides it having a better offroad capability because of ride height?

Has anyone here driven both? I have not had the chance to try them out yet.

The biggest difference I think you need to look at is the simple fact that they're different classes of vehicles. The Impreza hatchback is a -much- smaller vehicle than the CX-5... the hatch you're looking at is about the same size as a Mazda3 hatchback. While the CX-5 is very nimble for a small crossover, it is indeed a crossover rather than a compact hatch. In the Subaru lineup the Forester is more comparable to the CX-5 in terms of passenger space, cargo space, price point, etc.

Having driven both, I'd say they both feel about equally as peppy. I much preferred the added ride hight of the CX-5, but at 6'3 I'm biased there. If you have kids/passengers in your back seat with any frequency, the CX-5 has a huge advantage... I set the drivers seat for myself and was able to sit behind it with no knee room issues, a rare experience outside of full-size SUVs. And there's a world of difference between the two in terms of cargo space, especially with the seats down.

Neither of the two have any significant offroad capability, though the added ground clearance would help with deeper snow/getting over that huge pile the plow truck left in front of your driveway. If you really like the Impreza but want something with more ground clearance, I'd recommend checking out their XV Crosstrek... it's essentially a raised and SUV-ified Impreza Hatch. I drove one about three months ago and really enjoyed it, I think it has about the same ground clearence as the CX-5. They range from $22-28k depending on options, manual is only available in the base trim.

In your shoes, I'd go test drive the CX-5 and the XV Crosstrek and see what the seat of my pants say about it!

Hey hey hey CX-5 is a little faster check out around the 2:40 mark in the video

I've driven both.

Subaru Impressions:
I've always wanted a Subaru and was keen to give this a shot as my wife has had two Imprezas in the past with the 2.5L engine. Unlike her previous manual cars, I could only find Automatics to test-drive/purchase in my area. The engine felt very anemic in comparison to the previous 2.5L version and the CVT with "paddle shift" was ok but not great. In the end I told the dealer, No Manual = No Deal.
ENGINE: I was very disappointed that the 2.0L in the new Impreza, although very closely related to the 2.0L found in the Subaru BRZ, does not have direct injection (which gives improvements in torque and fuel economy) or anywhere near as much horsepower as the previous 2.5L base engine.
As for the INTERIOR, I thought it was just ok, and would not have gone with any choice other than the black cloth upholstery. The space inside was good for the class of car and the trunk was spacious enough.
EXTERIOR: I was not crazy about the new for 2012 body style, but the hatch was the lesser of two evils for me. It was rugged looking and could serve my commuter duties as well as weekend Kayak-hauling. The XV crosstrek, by the way, is the exact same car, just lifted.

Comparative Impressions for Mazda:
After driving the Impreza I test drove an automatic CX5 FWD spec. The pep felt slightly better in this car despite its added weight, but still no rocket ship. Lack of paddles had me attempting to use the "shift-tronic" or whatever that's called, and I didn't love it. Then I drove the manual CX5 and the engine felt right to me. I also learned that only the manual gets close to the advertised 35mpg on the highway, auto gets 32.

I liked the styling and the space of the CX5 much more, but at the time I was still trying to find something more wagon-like and less SUV-like. I don't live in a wintry climate so ground clearance isn't a big factor for me. In fact the height of the roof/rack is more important to me because at the end of a kayak trip I don't like tip-toeing to put my kayak on the roof. So I didn't immediately jump on the CX5 band wagon.

I decided to compromise on my final purchase decision and get the CX5 (manual) because it doesn't drive like an SUV, yet it has all the utility I could ask for, plus living in Florida I don't need the Subaru's AWD. Sorry for the long winded review.

Gio26NJ said:

Hey hey hey CX-5 is a little faster check out around the 2:40 mark in the video

Click to expand...

That video is exactly why I asked this question. They are very similar. And interior space is so close it doesn't really make a difference. I didn't want the XV because it is "lifted". I wanted the small car AWD practicality. Impreza is much cheaper than the XV so that is why I did not mention it. I don't think I will ever need that ride height. I wish they had a Mazda 3 hatch in AWD, and/or actually, I wish the Mazda 3 hatch looks more like the CX-5 b/c the CX-5 is sexy.

I also have 2 jetski's on a trailer (Total <1500 lbs). From past experiences, a Subaru Tribeca V6 was VERY slow to get to highway speed when towing my jet ski's. So I know to expect the CX-5 and Impreza to be even slower, but that doesn't matter since I live close to the river where I dock. I read that both cars have a 2000 lb towing capacity.

Anyways the steering feel and throttle response are the most important factors for me in terms of how they feel to drive so I will test drive them. Thank you for you inputs.

I don't own a new impreza, but I do have a 2003 Impreza and a CX-5 Touring.
My thought is they are two different class vehicle, does size a preference to you? Although on number the size are similar, but in real life, you have to go and sit in both to determine that, number doesn't count the real life operation.
Generally, Impreza is a very cheap simple car, $19,000 for an AWD, you know where the cost cutting are. But for 10 years,150k miles, the car has been hold up very well, problem free except normal wear items. Impreza is very simple and easy maintenance for me, the tehcnical support on NASIOC is massive. Subaru is very old school, they stick with there old tech, it's usually out dated, but dead reliable. One 10mm wrench and a philips screw driver take cares the most of the car. Just getting body part from Subaru takes longer compare to other Japanese manufacturers. Overall, I love my Impreza and I planned to keep it for a much longer time.
CX-5 has much premium interior, size, and technology. New technology on the engine, reliable is unknown, but the CX-5 does have some minor refinement issue such as vibrating hood and side mirrors at high speed, funky knocking sound at speed pumps etc. Other than that, CX-5 has been problem free for my 5000 miles. But it's better for long trip, comes with touch screen, push start button, easier in side out etc. The reason I bought the CX-5 is for my wife and the new born, since the infant seats doesn't feel very well in the impreza, and moving things inside out from impreza is not as easy as CX-5.

Don't forget there is insurance: Impreza will cost more than the CX-5 at this moment due to the impreza family(2.5i, WRX, STI) are mainly younger driver.

My thought before I bought the CX-5 was: Subaru and Mazda are kind of smaller company compare to Toyota, Nissan and Honda, Will their car make rattle noise? sure! Will they have minor issue? every car does. I treated Mazda about the same as Subaru and actually like the style on Mazda more than Subaru now because toyota involved too much in subaru's design. I can live with a subaru for 10 years, so I believe I can live a Mazda for 10 years.

Summary:
Impreza: younger, more spirit driving, easier to park, lower ride, AWD, cheap, easy.
CX-5: family, utility, gas saver driving but capable of cornering, great backup camera, higher ride, cost a bit more but lot more premium.

P.S.
Both cars are slow anyway. but the impreza speed up a bit easier from 45 to 70 mph based on my own experience.

shinjyo said:

Impreza: younger, more spirit driving, easier to park, lower ride, AWD, cheap, easy.
CX-5: family, utility, gas saver driving but capable of cornering, great backup camera, higher ride, cost a bit more but lot more premium.

Click to expand...

I think you might be a bit disappointed with the 2013 Impreza like I was. Wife had a 2006 and a 2008 model (both leased) and the 2013 model was just a downgrade. Of the 3, the '06 had the best looks, the '08 had the best interior (and a very premium feel I might add), but the '13 was a return to economizing the ride & interior, slowest of the three, and IMO worst exterior design (but I will agree to disagree with other Subie fans).

I cross-shopped both and was pretty excited about looking at the Impreza but didn't get past sitting in it.
It just felt too basic.
Nothing said 'quality'. It didn't have that really solid 'new' feel to it. It sat too low (felt even lower than the Mazda3). I think what I took as cheap inside is the real basic look for the outdoor type, maybe. But anyways it just didn't feel right or like I was getting much for my money.
When you load it up with options it doesn't upgrade the overall feel, it just adds more bells and whistles. To me the better feel, and higher sitting position of the CX5 was worth the higher price. (they didn't have the raised up VX at that time and I was tired of waiting for 'the next great car' to come out.
But check them both out, your opinion may be completely different than mine.

I almost got a 2012 Impreza but was deterred and decided to look elsewhere.
First, the Impreza is slow. I am not talking WRX slow (which is fine) but rather Corolla slow, especially with CVT. Not sure what Subaru did with their CVT, but it should have been quicker with rolling-start launch method compared with a manual.
Second, owners reported slew of quality issues, which affected some portion of them: moisture in the doors, hard start, creaking driver seat, broken passenger occupancy sensor, too much CVT breaking going downhill, questionable ratio selection at full-throttle at ~45MPH. What completely turned me off was oil consumption reported by some owners well after break-in, which Subaru refuses to fix.
Third, you are likely to get better fuel-economy with a CX-5 than an Impreza, especially with short trips/cold weather and if you choose CVT. I believe Subaru uses a traditional torque-converter, which locks perhaps at too high speed and does not lock when it is cold. Check fuelly and see that you are no likely to get any better fuel economy.
Finally, the Impreza is a tad small, especially for cargo.

The XV looks good on paper, only when you consider the MPG and slowness of the Impreza and think the XV will be worse for both, cost you more for the same interior volume and get worse on-road handling.

I've had my CX-5 for 2 months now and the closest finalists to it were the Imprezza and the Forester. I really liked the Imprezza because I prefer five door hatches with normal ride heights over jacked up crossovers/SUVs. In the end, I decided that the extra room inside the Mazda was worth the extra money and that it handled well enough that I could live with its design. That said, the reason I ruled out the 2012/13 Forester was because of it's poor fuel economy and antiquated 4 speed automatic transmission. It occurred to me at the time that the 2014 Forester, due out first quarter of 2013, would no doubt be much more like the CX-5 in terms of efficiency. Had I chosen to wait, which was not an option, the new Forester would no doubt have been a real contender and I would suggest you consider that model as it is much more comparable to the CX-5 than the Imprezza. The 2014 Forester was introduced at the LA Auto show last month, so details are widely available on the internet. It's worth a look.

Before I bought the CX-5 the kind of vehicle I was looking for was something with decent utility room (throwing mountain bikes in the back) and good fuel economy with regular gas (came from Acura TL.. premium gas.. boo). I test drove the new Impreza and the Crosstrek before buying the CX-5. For your everyday driving the Impreza, Crosstrek, and CX-5 seem just fine. None are fast, but the CX-5 felt a tad quicker and more fun to drive. I liked the extra gimmicks that the CX-5 had over the Impreza, besides the overall general reviews that favoured the CX-5 (a lot more negative points on the the Impreza/Crosstrek.. mainly about the CVT and manual).

As for ride height and ground clearance.. the CX-5 may not be the best for offroading where there are lots of dips in the road. I had an unfriendly encounter with a speedbump... I think people have said the way the front lip is shaped and designed does not give it a good approach angle when encounter obstacles. If you look at other CUV/SUV fronts you will notice a difference in the way some are shaped to allow for better approach angles.

For towing capacity.. I looked at this as well. For the Canadian models at least I believe only the Crosstrek and CX-5 are rated for towing. I think the Crosstrek is 1500lb, and the CX-5 is 2000lb. So... if you really need to tow I don't know how the Impreza engine would handle that if it is not rated to tow. They have modified the Crosstrek a bit to allow it to tow (beefed up frame a bit, and more cooling for the engine so I was told over Impreza).

I didn't get to test the Impreza/Crosstrek in snow, but the AWD CX-5 with winter tires handled the snow/freezing rain/ice pellets and sleet just fine (i got all of that yesterday).

On another note the Crosstrek and Impreza were lower on insurance for me than the CX-5.

Thank you for your feedback. They were all good reviews.