Anyone compare the Forester and CX-5 before buying?

Insurance, financing, recalls, & watch Forum
1

Leaning toward the CX-5 because of the regular automatic vs Subaru’s CVT, but figured I’d ask people who have driven both.

How does the acceleration and handling feel compared to the CX-5 (non-turbo)? What made you choose the Forester instead?

Most reviews say the CX-5 is quicker, but they’re usually comparing the turbo version…

2

I was all set on getting a CX-5 after getting rid of my Bronco… until I had a rental CX-5 for five weeks while my Bronco was in the shop. Put over a thousand miles on it and realized Subaru just does some things better.

  • Keyless entry – Subaru’s works better.
  • Blind spot monitoring – Subaru wins.
  • Backup camera – Subaru has better visibility. The CX-5 doesn’t even have moving guidelines unless you get the turbo.
  • AWD – Subaru’s is miles ahead.
  • Ground clearance – Forester sits higher.
  • Auto-dimming side mirrors – CX-5 doesn’t even offer them.
  • Towing – Subaru does better.
  • Roof racks – Forester is better for cargo on top.
  • Sunroof – Forester’s is huge.
  • Serviceability – Subaru’s layout is easier to work on. Oil filter is right on top.
  • Interior – CX-5 looks fancier, but Forester feels more durable. The steering wheel buttons on the CX-5 rental rattled and felt cheap.
  • Cargo space – No contest, Forester wins.
  • Resale value – Used CX-5s don’t hold their value like Foresters. A new CX-5 loses about $10k the second you drive off the lot where I live.

A few things where the CX-5 is better:

  • Transmission – The 6-speed auto is nice. Had a couple rough shifts, but overall solid.
  • Infotainment – Mazda’s system with the scroll wheel is way better.
  • Looks – CX-5 turbo and Carbon Edition look sharp.

Side note: Subaru’s CVT isn’t as bad as people say. It just feels like an automatic with a long first gear. Test drive one and see what you think.

One more thing:

  • Adaptive cruise and lane centering – Subaru’s is way better. Mazda’s is lagging behind. Subaru’s system works at all speeds, while Mazda only does lane centering under 45mph.
  • Tire pressure monitoring – Subaru actually shows all four tire pressures in the dash. The CX-5 only tells you when one is low.

I love Mazda (own a Miata and Mazda stock), but when I thought about daily life with the CX-5, the Forester just made more sense.

3

@Weston
255 days later and I still appreciate this. We’re looking at the same two cars, and this helped highlight some small but important differences I noticed on the test drive.

The one thing holding me back is how much Subaru relies on touchscreens. I’d rather have real buttons. But it seems like every car these days has some kind of trade-off.

4

@Kale
Glad it helped!

Ended up getting a 2024 Forester Wilderness, so no giant touchscreen. The 2024 still has real buttons.

If the big tablet Subaru is pushing had been my only option, I might have gone with the CX-5 turbo instead. Really liked Mazda’s infotainment setup.

Forester isn’t exciting to drive, but it’s super practical. Snow, ice, rough trails—it doesn’t care. Towing is okay, but you can tell it’s a unibody and not a truck. The CVT is fine, but not fun.

Honestly, I kind of miss the power of the CX-5 turbo. If I had to do it again, I might have just gone for the fun car and ignored the spreadsheets. But here we are.

5

@Weston
Where do you live? I’m in Texas and don’t really need AWD, so it feels like I’d be paying for something I wouldn’t use.

6

Haze said:
@Weston
Where do you live? I’m in Texas and don’t really need AWD, so it feels like I’d be paying for something I wouldn’t use.

I’m in Arkansas… even higher ground clearance and AWD help in heavy rain.

7

Haze said:
@Weston
Where do you live? I’m in Texas and don’t really need AWD, so it feels like I’d be paying for something I wouldn’t use.

Pacific Northwest. Subarus are everywhere here.

8

Haze said:
@Weston
Where do you live? I’m in Texas and don’t really need AWD, so it feels like I’d be paying for something I wouldn’t use.

I have both and live in Texas. AWD actually makes a difference in heavy rain and mud.

CX-5 (2019): Vinyl on the doors is peeling. Infotainment looks nice but freaks out—randomly changes inputs, volume, and drops connection to phones. No repairs needed yet, just basic maintenance.

Forester Sport (2021): Infotainment is clunky. CarPlay/Android Auto work most of the time, but sometimes just don’t. Steering wheel leather is already wearing off. Had to replace a thermo valve (expensive), and the windshield cracks way too easily.

9

CX-5 felt too small for what I needed. Didn’t want a big SUV, but needed more space than that.

10

Clancy said:
CX-5 felt too small for what I needed. Didn’t want a big SUV, but needed more space than that.

Yeah, if I go with the CX-5, it’s basically going to be just for me and maybe one passenger. Did it feel too cramped in the driver’s seat?

11

@Haze
I’m a bigger guy, so both felt a little tight, but the CX-5 was worse. Had to keep the seat all the way back. In the Forester, I don’t.

The bigger issue was cargo space. I needed room for my dog’s crate and my folding bike. The Forester fits both and still leaves room for another person in the back. The CX-5? Not so much.

You also get more features for the price in the Forester. The sunroof, for example, is way bigger.

12

Had both—a 2018 CX-5 and a 2019 Forester.

Didn’t really feel like the CX-5 was much faster. Visibility and space are way better in the Forester. The back seat is way more comfortable. AWD on the Forester is unbeatable.

CX-5’s infotainment was nice. But overall, I’d take the Forester again.

13

I have a Forester, my wife has a CX-5. We both love our own cars. CX-5 feels more refined, fewer rattles, quieter. But the Forester is better for outdoorsy stuff and has more space. Hard to go wrong either way.

14

Paddle shifters and sport mode helped with acceleration for me. CX-5’s interior felt cramped and visibility was bad. I have people in the back seat often, so the Forester made more sense.