Subaru vs. Mazda

Was going to buy a WRX or Forester with the turbo. Something did not sit right with me on the WRX, could not put my finger on what it was. Then one individual asked me how I looked with a flat brim ball cap and ear rings because that was what he usually saw driving one like they were on their way to a road rally.

I never warmed up to the Forester either. I think it was the boring interior.

Next up was the Ford Fusion Sport, 2.7 V6 twin turbo 325hp, lots of torque, AWD, can be tuned to 400 hp safely making it a sub 13 second car. For what it is, just too expensive and it seemed that those that bought began spending more money modding the e car further. I could not get any dealer to go under $28k + tax, the depreciation was awful on the car, and it does not look like it will be around long.

Now I'm looking at the CX5. Owned only Japanese branded cars since 1984. The Mazda product just seems to catch my attention much more than others in the same price range. The 2017 interior is really well done.
 
Subaru just settled a class action law suit where some of their environmentally friendly, feel the love motors would burn a quart of oil every 1,200 miles on a NEW car. Subaru told the owners that was SOP and eventually settled admitting no problems or wrong doing giving the owners a 100,000 warranty on the engine. Can you imagine?
 
old-school said:
Subaru just settled a class action law suit where some of their environmentally friendly, feel the love motors would burn a quart of oil every 1,200 miles on a NEW car. Subaru told the owners that was SOP and eventually settled admitting no problems or wrong doing giving the owners a 100,000 warranty on the engine. Can you imagine?
Click to expand...

The piston rings on Subarus are absolutely ridiculous. So much oil consumption.

I find the flat 4 engine to just be overly complicated, not smooth, not torquey and make an absolutely s*** sound unless you have equal length headers, but they dont fit equal length headers from the factory because of their design.

Oh, and its much more difficult to work on then an inline engine. I dont get why a flat 4.
 
Ive had 2 WRXes (both 2011 models) and my wife has had 2010, 2012, and 2016 Outbacks. All were outstanding cars with no reliability issues.

I now drive a CX3 and my wife has a CX5.

Subaru makes great cars, but its clear to see their philosophy difference vs Mazda. Subarus are more appliance-like, less involving to drive. They have a giant premium on traction (which, is a good thing). Mazda is much more driver-centric, and their cars just have an intangible "fun-ness" and level of driver involvement that Subaru just doesnt have.

All that being said, I would still shop Subaru again for our next vehicle, but we are very happy with our 2 Mazdas that we have. And I like many others, hope Mazda does a Mazdaspeed 3, CX3, or 6 , or something more in that vein soon.
 
jthj said:
Yea, it's hard to say for sure. Even if they call it something else I just want something with sharp handling, don't mind a little rough ride, and ~250 + HP/TQ in a Mazda 3 sized hatchback. AKA a hot hatch ;)
Click to expand...
Well the new engine is supposed to have a supercharger for some bottom end grunt
 
Drove a Forester. Was shocked at the lack of refinement. At a stop my leg on brake pedal was shaking. CVT response was non linear. It felt fast then sloppy then plain disinterested at varying speeds when you press the throttle. That interior reminds me of 2005
 
I own two Subaru, 2011 Outback 3,6r and a Legacy. I ended up trading in the legacy for the new 2017 CX-5.
In terms of value, the Mazda definitely offers more for the money.
Despite being top trim, neither Subaru interior compares to the Mazda. Not to mention the navigation system was horrible. It was also not the most comfortable ride.
However, I still love my Subarus... The AWD system is unmatched, driven it through the mud, flooded roads, and heavy snow conditions. It got me to where I needed to go, always. Not to mention, I've never had any mechanical issues with neither vehicles. But since my new commute to work has been significantly shortened and I was pushing pass 100k mileage on my subaru, I decided to trade it in. I didn't want to get the same car again and the new subaru hasn't changed all that much, so I went with the Mazda since it has that more of a luxurious feel to it. In my opinion, Mazda offered more for the money, it drives smooth and looks absolutely gorgeous!
 
My daughter has a 2014 Forester, and it burns at least 3 quarts of oil between changes. The A/C works for about 3 weeks and then needs to charged, the dealer can't find the leak. I would not recommend a Suby.
 
I don't care for any of the Impreza platform Subarus. Every one I've been in seems like a cheap, loud, unrefined econobox. The Legacy and Outback are OK, but they're not fun.

A LOT of our friends and family have owned Outbacks and most loved them. My wife bought one a decade ago, a top trim Limited XT with the turbo. She loved it, but cost of ownership has been high. Repairs are expensive, service intervals are short, it requires premium gas. Some of the repairs were expected for a high mileage car, e.g. turbo, A/C, dampers, radiator sprung a leak. What I didn't expect was that we'd wear out the whole chassis starting around 120k miles. At this point, we've replaced every bearing, bushing, ball joint, and other wearable item, brake calipers, and even a mysteriously broken coil spring.

After 180k miles and kids, she bought a minivan to haul the family, and now I'm stuck driving the old Subaru. It is comfortable, and reasonably quiet, and traction in the snow is outstanding. I like the fact that it's a wagon and not tall for the sake of tallness like so many SUVs/CUVs, but unfortunately that doesn't translate into better handling. The suspension is built to handle some light off-roading, which means there is too much movement and body roll for fun cornering on a twisty road. Also, the turbo is laggy and the 5-speed AT's torque converter stays unlocked about 90% of the time, so throttle response is slushy. So it's just boring to drive.
 
I have owned a couple of Subaru's, including a WRX and an outback. Very fun cars that are absolutely fantastic in snow and wet weather. But mine were very un-reliable and really expensive to own.
 
Jman136 said:
Just wondering what you all think about Subaru compared to Mazda? At first, I was dead set on getting a brand new Subaru WRX. That turbo is fun, and I driver several of them. They are amazing cars, and the AWD is awesome. However, I just couldn’t get over how junky the interior was for 30k car.

So, I decided to test drive a 17 Mazda GT. I knew I wanted AWD and most likely a SUV for the extra space. Anyway, on my first test drive I fell in love, and the rest is history.

I’m just curious is any of you have owned a Subaru? What were your thoughts on it?

Now, I’m just hoping that my GT holds up since I didn’t buy the extended warranty :) they seem durable!
Click to expand...

I have a 2015 CX5 AWD. A good friend has a Subaru WRX. The interior of his car looks 2005 to me, but the dynamics, handling, acceleration, and AWD are quite nice. If I did not find utility in ground clearance and so forth that the CX5 offers, there is no way in hell I'd ever bother with a CX5 over a WRX. My one gripe on the WRX is that it's still "boxy", and not a sexy kindof box, either. The way the overhang functions with the rims visually just aggravates the hell out of me. The fox-body mustang...was a box. but I find it kindof a sexy box. The overhang/profile/rims "work". The WRX? Not so much. It looks like a cheap ass Sentra.
2016-subaru-wrx-and-wrx-sti-more-luxury-more-features-photo-658662-s-450x274.jpg

2017-Nissan-Sentra-NISMO-front-three-quater-01.jpg


This is literally my biggest gripe on the WRX. Front profile hood/fascia/overhang profile as viewed from a 30-45* angle frontal and slightly above, as well as how the back end "lays" visually. (as standing in a parkinglot approaching the vehicle.)

Short overhangs. Boxy front/end. Sleek bubbly roof. Blech!
 
The oil consumption thing is particularly bad with Subaru. Most Automakers have made the rings a little looser to improve fuel economy which causes it. However Subaru used to have really bad fuel economy so they had to go 100% CVT, no longer symmetrical AWD, in addition to the rings. Fuel efficiency is now average for them. I think the only real advantage of the boxer engine which is center of gravity seems to be wasted on most of their models since the suspension is so soft and there really isn’t any sportiness there. WRX/STi is the exception.
 
I owned a Subaru Impreza Limited 2012, the only positive thing on this vehicle it's the AWD other than that looks cheap. The power it's inexistant, I mean no power at all, lack of technology, MPG are worse if you compare to other competitors.
I regret to buy this car. I keep the car 3 years.
 
I tested Forester/cx 5 and crv, I got cx5 at the end.
Just don't like the interior design for subaru, I think cx-5 has the best for the same level cars, but cx-5 space is not a strong point. I guess think what you need.
 
My brother bought a new Subaru two years ago, I don't remember the exact model, it was a four-door car. It was nothing but trouble for him. Everything started rattling after a few months. The engine was burning oil from day one (keep in mind, this was a brand new car). He had to add a quart of oil every month or two. Subaru eventually issued a recall for the oil burning, but told him his car wasn't burning enough oil to qualify for the recall. Based on the issues he had, and how Subaru responded to the issues, I would never consider buying one.
 
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Chocolate
    • Like
Consumer Reports New Car Issue 2024
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
N7turbo
N7turbo
G
    • Like
    • Wow
CX-5 Turbo is the best AWD SUV for the money
2 3
Replies
56
Views
6K
jofo67
J
S
2024 Test Drive: CX-5, Outback and Forester
Replies
3
Views
512
yrwei52
yrwei52

Latest posts

Back