Honda CR-V vs. Subaru Outback
wicarbuyer1
Member Posts: 1
I've seen some discussion on here between these somewhat similar cars, however I haven't heard much commented on regarding cargo space. I've narrowed my car buying search down to these two vehicles and am having a VERY hard time deciding. Went in very high on the outback, now I'm not so sure. Any comments would help, esp. re: cargo room. Thanks in advance!
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Consumer Reports just tested one and it became their highest rated small crossover, though the CR-V and Outback and also recommended.
The Outback is lower and longer than these, a bit nicer inside. My wife liked the higher seating point of the Forester and it's a little shorter and easier to park, so we got that.
I went with the Subaru. Only reason being, the seller wanted $3,800 vs the $8,000 the crazed woman selling her CRV wanted.
Having had my outback now for over a month, had the woman gone for $7,000 on the CRV, I think I would have gone for that instead. The Subaru is fine. It justs feels more of a tank (sluggish, heavy) than I prefer in my cars. The CRV seemed to have better pick-up, and somewhat better fuel economy (I'm only getting 18mpg -- 13L/100km) . I Like the Subaru fine, I just think I would have enjoyed the feel and gas savings of the CRV a little better.
My 98 Forester never did that poorly - except when I was towing a heavy load.
There's just one and it's $80 or so. I had to replace mine when some chipmunks chewed up my wiring harness! :surprise:
What I suggest is that you actually take your crates with you for a test fit.
I haven't compared the new 2009 Forester, but I understand there's more usable space in this years Forester so I don't know which one I'd pick if I compared them today. In about 2 years I hope to get a diesel stick-shift Forester and the wife will drive the automatic Outback.
We bought a 2007 Outback "iwagon" two years ago. We have two kids under 9, and we wanted a safe, reliable vehicle with better mileage than an SUV that could go in the snow in the winter.
The Outback is safe. And it goes in the snow. But we aren't sure about reliability, and it can be as annoying as heck. After two years, our observations:
- Not enough width in the front seats; we're not huge people, but my knees are cramped on both sides no matter how I adjust the seat and wheel. Thought I could used to it but instead it has become more annoying (maybe I'm getting bigger?!).
- Not enough room in the back seat for the kids in their car seats ... and even if our oldest goes without a booster, if he is behind me, he is cramped. If Subaru only had taken 5 inches from the cargo area and put them in the back seat ... you rarely use that cargo room, and when you do need it, fold the seats down. But no.
- It has issues starting, especially at altitude. One time my wife took our son skiing at about 9500 feet and it wouldn't start. She eventually got it going with use of the gas pedal, and when we called the dealer, they said this is common and it is a quirk of a Subaru. My wife has been reluctant to take the car into the mountains ever since. It also turns over very - I mean, very - slowly in weather below 15 degrees F. I have a '93 Corolla that doesn't do that. We thought it was a battery problem and replaced it with a higher end battery. Still does it. I called Subaru of America and they assigned a case number, but no one ever contacted me.
- We have a 4 cyl AT, and it shifts back and forth almost randomly when we take it up a long incline. Very annoying. Again, my '93 Corolla, with far less horsepower, at least shifts in a logical fashion on inclines.
- The brakes have begun grinding .. a low, deep sound. Dealer said it was excess brake dust and cleaned them off for free. Grinding continued. It isn't every time. Doesn't seem to correlate to cold. It comes and goes. Never had a car do this.
- The bizarre tire pressure monitoring system comes on every other time we have a big change in daytime temp one day to daytime temp the next day (which where I live can be as much as 60 degrees). The dealer said the TPMS gives false positives so we ignored it for a few weeks, then had the tires checked during oil change and two were indeed low. That has happened twice in two years (different tires) ... why do these tires seem to lose air so easily? Neither of our other cars have this issue. We don't know whether to trust the TPMS or not, and I'm back to checking manually just like in 1985.
People where we live who have Subarus seem to love them, but our experienced has been poor. The car is sound. It just seems to have weird issues that are the opposite of what we would like, and some of them get at the very heart of what a car should do - work well. So we've been test driving the CR-V and RAV-4, and we are close to trading in the Outback and buying the Honda (also underpowered, but at least it shifts normally and has a 3rd gear lock for consistent power).
Our last remaing question: Is a CR-V as good in the snow as an Outback?
That's our .02's.
No. The CRV has an on-demand AWD, meaning it's only AWD when the front wheels slip, otherwise it's a FWD car. Not so with the Outback, or any Subaru, as they have full-time AWD.
Bob
this particular Subaru AWD is very similar to Honda's.
You want to be safe in snow, ice and whatever winter throws at you at elevation of 9500 feet you use winter tires, probably studless ice tires like Blizzak WS-60.
And do not use them with less than half of the tread left in winter.
Krzys
PS TPMS as any device that is supposed to help humans in very uncomplicated endavour causes more problems than it solves. Say thank you to your congressman or representative and do not forget Ford and Firestone/Bridgestone.
PS2 What oil are you using in winter?
Don't use a special oil in winter ... have had the Outback serviced only at the dealer (usually do that until warranty is over), so whatever they put in is what we use. I assume it is the correct oil.
You'd sure be blamed if it wasn't! :surprise:
You know what I miss? The unpainted bumper and cladding. The 1998 was bullet proof. You hit something and the bumper would bounce back in to place, magically self-healing. It was incredibly durable and easy to keep clean.
I would file a complaint with NHTSA for not having this information in the OWNER's MANUAL. The CR-V manual states to have throttle partially open when starting at higher altitudes, or extreme cold.
Half the vehicles in the ski mountain parking lot are Subarus, are they kidding? There would be hundreds of them stranded if that were normal.
http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr032409.html
I like the cargo space in the Outback, it has a long floor area so I have less need to stack items vertically, and the back seat folds flat, and I like the ability to tow my pop-up camper while carrying 2 kayaks on top. The Outback is rated to pull 2700 lbs.
John
I've noticed a trend with crash tests in the small SUV segment.
Subaru does well right off the bat. For instance the 99 Forester earned a "Good" in the frontal offset test, the first in class to do so. The new roof crush test appears and again Subaru does well right away, the first time it's tested.
Honda and Toyota tend to learn their lessons, i.e. they get it right on the 2nd attempt. Note how they tend to have middling scores at first, but then improve with redesigns and catch up to Subaru. I bet the next generations of the CR-V and RAV4 will match the Forester's roof crush resistance, in fact I'd bet on it.
Finally, the Koreans always seem to be 2 steps behind. Very disappointing that they finally were improving on their frontal scores and then we see dismal scores for the roof structure.
Kudos to Subaru, though, for getting it right from the get-go.