2007 Honda CR-V or Subaru Forester

[pup2]

I didn't base my decision on looks. Most of it was because of riding comfort and specs. The FXT's lead on both were so big it was almost a no-brainer -- mas mahirap pa yung FXT vs. 2.0.

Honda fan ako. This is my first subbie. I knew the CRV strengths and weaknesses since I owned a Gen 1 CRV. Even then natagtagan na kami ng mga pasahero ko, despite it being the nicest riding CRV daw. As for specs, practical ang space at features ng CRV for sure -- but not even having Sport Shift in their top model did it for me.

Mabagal na nga AT wala pang sport shift di lalo na ako mababagalan doon.

[zxd168pzz]

1. If horsepower and torque are important to you, get the Forester. The CR-V is a slow poke by any standards.
2. Some say it's a station wagon. If you're not offended by it's half-ass looks then that's okay.
3. CR-V still looks like a girl's cross-over to me. Forester, hmmm.. can still pass for a guy because of the stance and reputation for power.
4. If you ask me, this is not an apples-to-apples combination. Forester is definitely the alpha male in this comparo.

Cheers

[SteveMcQueen]

I hear that Subaru's sales here in Manila is steadily growing month-on-month. It seems more consumers are joining the bandwagon. I think that after 5 years, when people begin considering replacing their mini-SUVs, they'll be better informed as to the superior advantages of the Subaru Forester (even just the base 2.0X). It will just be a matter of time. Subaru will eventually gain more and more market share as people see more and more Subarus on the road.