Mazda CX-5 2.5l AWD vs Subaru Forester XT

**EQAddict** · July 17th, 2013 08:18 PM

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** · July 18th, 2013 05:20 PM

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** · July 18th, 2013 05:29 PM

Congrats on your decision! Enjoy your new ride!

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

**c_cube** · July 25th, 2013 07:31 PM

thanks for all the inputs people..

we got our unit na..

Sent from my Omega HD 2.0 using Tapatalk 2

**rac98** · July 26th, 2013 01:09 AM

Wow! Congrats sir!

**EQAddict** · July 26th, 2013 02:31 PM

ganda talaga .

give us a review please.

**Egan101** · July 26th, 2013 02:51 PM

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

**speed_kills** · July 29th, 2013 03:07 AM

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** · July 30th, 2013 01:42 PM

Originally Posted by foresterx

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** · July 30th, 2013 01:57 PM

Originally Posted by 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.

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