Mazda CX-5 2.5l AWD vs Subaru Forester XT

[EQAddict]

I have the new 2014 XT. I get about 5.5 km/l pure city driving. Its still less than 800km after two months with me so i am not sure if my FC is representative. I dont baby that car though. Its really nice, fast, quiet and its got flappy paddles and up to 8 virtual gears to shift thru. The lcd screen is nice and shows lots of info and is very configurable. The harman sound system sounds great. Its big inside relative to the other CUVs and did i say its really quiet inside the cabin? . The awd cx5 seems like a great car as well and it will certainly get better fc . But in a straight line theres no way it will have a chance against the turbo xt.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[foresterx]

I have the new 2014 XT. I get about 5.5 km/l pure city driving. Its still less than 800km after two months with me. I dont baby that car. Its really nice, fast, quiet and its got flappy paddles and up to 8 virtual gears to shift thru. The lcd screen is nice and shows lots of info and is very configurable. The harman sound system sounds great. Its big inside relative to the other CUVs . The awd cx5 seems like a great car as well and it will certainly get better fc . But in a straight line theres no way it will have a chance against the turbo xt.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

you used to have the old xt also right? if you do, how does it compared against the new one?

[The Prince]

This was also my dilemma two weeks ago, but i resorted instead to the AWD CX5. it is jam packed with features such as the i-STOP, lane departure system and the rear view monitoring system. It is also cheaper by more or less 200k. AWD is okay, (not as the Subaru Foresters AWD) but, it can be reliable when you need it more. My CX5 AWD FC for almost 900kms is at 8km/l. Not bad. I am hoping that this will still improve.

[EQAddict]

Yes i had the older one as well. i posted my review in the forester xt forum and some pics as well a couple months back. if you ask me the kick of the older xt was more pronounced. It was more raw. However in every other respect the new one is more refined and civil. Better interior, gauges, lcd screen, sound system, much much bigger interior space, power boot, led driving lamps, flappy paddles for better control and enjoyment. The cvt actually should help with fuel consumption. But i always leave it on sport # mode so i never get the benefit. Its got three driving modes now ( intelligent, sport and sport # ) plus its also got something called x-drive. Its a button you press that **** the car into all out awd mode with all the nanny sensors and electronics working fully.

The older xt felt like a tin can ( remember how light those doors felt? ) and it was kinda lacking in sound insulation. The new one feels much more solid and quiet. That was the biggest difference i noticed from the get go.

In terms of power the 240 hp of this new model is no slouch either. The old one had 230 hp. Its just that it only had 4 gears hence its power delivery was more raw.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[EQAddict]

The nice thing about the turbo is the torque is always there in any gear. No need to downshift or fully depress the accelerator pedal to get that sweet rush of power. That will always be its advantage over a NA engine.

Im hooked on turbo.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[foresterx]

nice! i've driven both and like you said the new xt is more refined compared to the old xt, but the old xt for me feels sportier. maybe i'm just not used to the cvt. anyway did you post your review in this forum or another? will definitely check it out.

i used to love turbo'd cars but lately been hooked on N/A engines. turbo'd cars are no doubt fast and has that kick once the turbo spools but once you drive a properly tuned n/a engine on the track it really changes your mind about turbo'd cars. i still love turbo cars though but if i want a dedicated track car i'd get a n/a.

[c_cube]

Anong meron sa battery ng CX-5, bro?

yun battery niya with start and stop function. hindi pwede yun mga locally made na battery.

im not sure lang yun mga imported like amaron kung meron na ganitong battery na binebenta dito

pero i doubt dahil walang bibili dahil mazda palang yata nagdala ng istop feature dito sa pinas

[EQAddict]

nice! i've driven both and like you said the new xt is more refined compared to the old xt, but the old xt for me feels sportier. maybe i'm just not used to the cvt. anyway did you post your review in this forum or another? will definitely check it out.

i used to love turbo'd cars but lately been hooked on N/A engines. turbo'd cars are no doubt fast and has that kick once the turbo spools but once you drive a properly tuned n/a engine on the track it really changes your mind about turbo'd cars. i still love turbo cars though but if i want a dedicated track car i'd get a n/a.

Yes I posted in the subaru section of tsikot under the forester 2014 thread. Showed some pics of the car and the speedometer as well when I was doing a high speed run hahaha

Edit: under the Subaru Forerster 2014 thread : page 37,38 and 42 (where the pics are)

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 2

[foresterx]

Yes I posted in the subaru section of tsikot under the forester 2014 thread. Showed some pics of the car and the speedometer as well when I was doing a high speed run hahaha

Edit: under the Subaru Forerster 2014 thread : page 37,38 and 42 (where the pics are)

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 2

thanks will check it out right now.

[c_cube]

after discount 233k is the differnce from cx5 awd

im leaning toward the cx5 because of practicality and FC but that boxer engine is giving me headaches hahaha but im no speed freak

Sent from my Omega HD 2.0 using Tapatalk 2

[EQAddict]

More than speed.... Its the torque thats addictive. You dont have to go fast to feel the pull of a turbo. And that makes a huge driveability difference in everyday driving.

But i agree the cx5 awd is more affordable and fuel efficient. And its got plenty of power at 190hp. More than the crv and rav4 if iam correct. Guess it boils down to your preferences.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk H

[c_cube]

after deliberation, decided to go with cx5. probably tom will make a reservation na.

practicality kicked in eh, hindi yun turbo hahaha

Sent from my Omega HD 2.0 using Tapatalk 2

[tr1ck5h07]

Congrats on your decision! Enjoy your new ride!

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

[c_cube]

thanks for all the inputs people..

we got our unit na..



Sent from my Omega HD 2.0 using Tapatalk 2

[rac98]

Wow! Congrats sir!

[EQAddict]

ganda talaga .

give us a review please.

[Egan101]

Congrats sa new ride! Antayin namin yung first ride accounts mo, then followed by long-term review.

[speed_kills]

Got to study both cars in the showrooms last week and here are some observations (and nitpicks)...

Mazda CX-5 2.5L AWD
+ may look somewhat small from the outside but interior space is actually more than adequate
+ leather seats are very comfortable and bolstered just right
+ interior dash layout looks a bit more premium than the Forester
- rear seat backrest are a bit too upright and are fixed
- comes with push button start but no outer door release buttons which sort of defeats the purpose of the push start system
- no dedicated door central unlock button from the inside (?)

Subaru Forester 2.0 XT
+ comes with very big windows and sunroof which is very good for ambiance
+ rear seats can be reclined a bit unlike the CX-5 (although a proper lever would have been much better than a nylon strap)
+ feels more spacious than the CX-5
- seats do not seem to have enough support, so there is a tendency to slip from your seat when driving fast or turning
- comes with rear camera but neither front nor reverse parking sensors
- power delivery is very smooth but steering feel seems too light

By the way, I've yet to test drive the CX-5 as it seems Mazda don't have any test units yet.

For me, the CX-5 practically has most features a typical car buyer will ever need at only around 1.6M+. The Forester XT, on the other hand, drives very powerful and looks a bit more upscale. If you consider the discount, maintenance promo, and insurance cost differences, the XT will probably come up around 300k pesos more than the CX-5.

In conclusion, despite some flaws, both are very good CUV's depending on your priority. Also, they are probably a better enthusiast option compared to the new RAV4 and CRV.

[aylaisabelle]

depends on what you want. if you want raw power and performance none of the XT's competitors can compete against it. i haven't driven the cx-5 awd but from what i've read and heard the cx-5 awd is more comfortable and has better fc compared to the XT. i'd be happy with any of the 2, those are my top choices if i was in the market for a small suv, i'd rather own a cx-5 or xt than a rav4, tucson or cr-v.

I totally agree! The XT looks really great. It's more mucho than the cx-5. Although, the Cx-5 is really promising. I love the look and the technology that comes with it as well.

Good choices with either of the vehicle. One thing to consider is the suspension of the SUVs. I gotta mention this that the suspension of the Monty is really comfortable compared to other SUVs.

[germs]

Got to study both cars in the showrooms last week and here are some observations (and nitpicks)...

Mazda CX-5 2.5L AWD
+ may look somewhat small from the outside but interior space is actually more than adequate
+ leather seats are very comfortable and bolstered just right
+ interior dash layout looks a bit more premium than the Forester
- rear seat backrest are a bit too upright and are fixed
- comes with push button start but no outer door release buttons which sort of defeats the purpose of the push start system
- no dedicated door central unlock button from the inside (?)

Subaru Forester 2.0 XT
+ comes with very big windows and sunroof which is very good for ambiance
+ rear seats can be reclined a bit unlike the CX-5 (although a proper lever would have been much better than a nylon strap)
+ feels more spacious than the CX-5
- seats do not seem to have enough support, so there is a tendency to slip from your seat when driving fast or turning
- comes with rear camera but neither front nor reverse parking sensors
- power delivery is very smooth but steering feel seems too light

By the way, I've yet to test drive the CX-5 as it seems Mazda don't have any test units yet.

For me, the CX-5 practically has most features a typical car buyer will ever need at only around 1.6M+. The Forester XT, on the other hand, drives very powerful and looks a bit more upscale. If you consider the discount, maintenance promo, and insurance cost differences, the XT will probably come up around 300k pesos more than the CX-5.

In conclusion, despite some flaws, both are very good CUV's depending on your priority. Also, they are probably a better enthusiast option compared to the new RAV4 and CRV.

Meron na ata Sir sa Alabang and Greenhills. You might want to try whichever is nearest you.