Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Outback vs. Accord CrossTour

2»

Comments

  • I've never driven a Crosstour, to really compare it to my Outback (2010 3.6R Limited), but my reactions from sitting in one are:

    - I don't mind the styling, and the front end looks pretty nice, but I think I like the appearance of my Outback a bit more
    - It seems well put together, and perhaps exudes a slightly more upscale feel (comparing higher end equipages to my Limited).
    - The reduction in cargo space due to the sloping hatch was a real negative for me.
    - The rear shock towers intrude a lot into the cargo space, making it even less useful.
    - I'm convinced that the Subaru AWD system is superior.
    - It seemed like a similarly-equipped Crosstour was going to cost a couple/few $k more than I paid for my vehicle.

    I DID think that the interior materials were very nice in the Honda, and they did make a larger under-floor cargo space/cubby than the one in the Outback.

    Perhaps this is silly, but I got the light (cream color, basically) leather interior in my Outback, and would have wanted a tan/biege/cream interior in the Crosstour. But the Crosstour's tan leather is very yellow-looking. That by itself would have been a deal-breaker for me... In any case, nothing about the Crosstour gives me cause for regret at having bought the Outback.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    It would seem so! LOL
  • I've driving both cars & different cyl except for the Honda Crosstour which only comes in a 6 cyl while the OB comes in two. The Crosstour drove kinda rough & it didn't handle as good as my Pilot did after I so it. The Honda dealership here in town really gave me a bad impression all the way around toward me after I bought 4 hondas from them so it made me compare the two vechicles & others. The Subaru OB with the 2.5 4 cyl is the one that I ended up getting, because it met my needs what I wanted in the vechicle. I wanted something a little bigger than the CRV & a little smaller than the pilot I had and plus the same cargo area as my Pilot. The OB I felt rode & drove very comfortable than the Crosstour & it was about $6,000.00 cheaper than the Crosstour. I think the 4 cyl in the OB has just as much power as my Pilot did & also the Crosstour did too. The OB has alot more room in it as the Crosstour did and plus I can get my mobilty scooter into the OB with out putting the rear seat down. My wife & I was very impress with sooo much room in the OB than the Crosstour. I think that the Subaru OB came a long way to improve in the roomie for the year 2010 & 2011. I think I made a perfect chose of getting the OB over the Crosstour. I was very disappointed in the Honda dealership the way they treated me put oh well.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Congrats.

    I think the OB weighs a bunch less and the keeps the engine in the sweet spot. That compensates for the lack of 6 cylinders. Unless you got a manual?
  • "I think the OB weighs a bunch less"

    It does....about 700 pounds less than an AWD Crosstour .
    No argument that if you need more cargo room, the Outback is better. I've found the CT to be very good in snow, but have not compared it to the the Outback. Maybe the Suby's noticeably better?

    Per Edmunds, the Crosstour is 1.9 sec faster 0-60, 5.2 mph faster through the slalom. J D Power's IQ survey gives the CT a 5.0 vs. 2.5 for the Outback. Not saying this is conclusive, but worth paying SOME attention to.....Most of the IL staff admitted the CT's a good driving roadtripper, even if they didn't like the way it looks, and its looks do have fans. Personally ,I think it looks good on alternate days.
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,673
    edited April 2011
    Per Edmunds, the Crosstour is 1.9 sec faster 0-60, 5.2 mph faster through the slalom. J D Power's IQ survey gives the CT a 5.0 vs. 2.5 for the Outback.

    Sure the 6-cylinder 3.5L Crosstour will out-accelerate the 4-cylinder 2.5L Outback. You need to compare the Crosstour to the 6-cylinder 3.6L Outback.

    Bob
  • Not trying to pick a fight....previous 2 posts were referring to the 2.5 version.

    I'm sure the 3.6 has a lot more grunt, and costs considerably more.

    The 2.5 that has been highlighted refers to a SCORE of 2.5 out of 5 in an initial quality survey. You can give it as much or as little credence as you want.......
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,673
    Not picking a fight either. :)

    However, a 3.6 H6 Outback with (standard) AWD starts at $28,195. That is considerably less than a 3.5 Crosstour with (optional) 4WD, which starts at $34,140. In fact the 3.6 Outback is even less expensive than the base-level 2WD Crosstour ($29,790).

    http://www.subaru.com/vehicles/outback/index.html

    http://automobiles.honda.com/accord-crosstour/price.aspx

    Bob
  • No argument.........it lists cheaper, but if your interested in both vehicles, you should check what they can actually be bought for. Each of them have features that would be deal makers or breakers, depending on what you need and want.
  • ronnronn Posts: 398
    I would enjoy your opinion Laurence. Since you work for Subaru, I assume you would be more for the Subaru, but I love the sporty look of the CT, and after reading the reviews, people that have them love them...I don't know why people think they are ugly...i think it is one beautiful , different sporty looking car with alot of luxury...The OB is a great car, but it is a wagon...the CT sure isn't that.......it is more a sports car, so I find it hard to compare the two.
  • winter2winter2 Posts: 1,798
    edited January 2013
    I own a 2013 Outback Premium. After three months, so far so good. I nearly purchased a Honda CRV but backed away after discovering that Honda is having issues with their automatic transmissions. The issue is that the automatic is out of the Accord and Honda uses this trans in several of their vehicles including the CRV and the Odessey minivan. The issue here is that Honda does not modify the trans to accomodate the extra weight of the minivan nor do they modify the trans to accomodate the extra strain placed on the trans by the AWD system found on the CRV or the Crosstour. This said, the trans fails early due to overheating. I got this info from one Honda dealership and a couple of trans shops. The other issue is that the Honda trans suffer from shiftitis as they continually hunt for the best gear.

    The CVT in the 2013 is decent and smooth albeit a bit whiny. It is responsive and Subaru has pretty much done away with the "rubber band" sensation when you demand passing power.
  • ronnronn Posts: 398
    It seems that Crosstour fans will disagree......The people that own them say they are excellent, smooth quiet , and the V6 runs smooth as silk...perhaps you are talking about the 4 which would be too small. I personally love the looks of the crosstour...it is more sporty than an outback, even though they are great cars too....I just don't want a wagon look.....I like the sleek look of the hatchback
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,673
    edited January 2013
    Are you going for "looks" or "function?"

    If it's looks, well, that's a matter of opinion. I'm not a fan of either the Crosstour or the Outback in terms of styling.

    If it's function, the Outback wins hands down. The cargo area is better shaped for large bulky objects. The rear wheel wheel intrusion is less than in the Crosstour, and the rear visibility is far better in the Outback. The Crosstour is big on the outside, but small (relatively speaking) on the inside. Also, AWD is only available on the top-trim model, whereas every Ouctback has AWD. The Outback also has more ground clearance to better cope with deep snow and bad roads.

    The Crosstour may (?) be the sportier ride, but Honda is having a very hard time selling them. Most people just don't like the car. The Outback is a far better seller, simply because it makes more sense.

    Bob
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,501
    I agree with you on every point made. Neither is particularly attractive, yet one is much more practical.
  • ronnronn Posts: 398
    Thanks guys....i am single, so I don't need much cargo space....I am basically going for the sporty look with small cargo space........I just like the Crosstour because you don't see so many of them...it's different looking, but I think it is attractive......people that have them love them just like the Subaru.......both are reliable vehicles...I really enjoy a hatchback.....had one years ago with a Toyota Celica......
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Guy next door bought one, I'll have to ask him how he likes it.

    Before the Crosstour he had a Volvo Cross Country.
  • Ronn

    DRIVE these cars, then get back to us.

    Big fan of the new V6 / 6spd....the CT got the same powertrain treatment as the new Accord. The drive ain't everything, but its pretty big on my personal list.
2»
Sign In or Register to comment.