New Nissan Xtrail 4x2 vs Subaru Forester 2.0L

[bigbundle]

Hi guys. Need your help in choosing between the two cars. It would be for my wife to drive. Will really appreciate inputs, comments and suggestions. You can even suggest another brand and model for our consideration (we also considered the Mazda CX5, Honda CRV, RAV 4, and the ASX)

Thanks in advance

[go-to-guy]

Maganda xtrail but i heard and read that the forester is excellent when it comes to safety. You can cross out the other SUVs. Btw there will be a CX5 facelift next year. I heard that they will also put the infotainment system from the Mazda3 to the cx5.

[Egan101]

The Forester is ahead of the pack in terms of sales in the CUV segment. It offers more in terms of value even with the entry level model. It has AWD already compared to most entry level CUV's which is only FWD, plus all the safety features that Subaru puts into their cars. The Xtrail does offer a 3rd row seat but reviews say it is a bit cramped.

[JohnM]

Arrange for a test drive. Nothing beats brochure numbers like time behind the wheel. Parang shopping for shoes lang yan. Maganda sa display pero di pala maganda ang fit wala rin.

Anyway:

The Xtrail is longer than the Forester.

The Forester has big glass windows and great all around visibility.

The Xtrail's interior looks more upscale than the simpler one that Subaru offers (I prefer simple though )

Both are made in Japan.

[niky]

AWD

...is not of any benefit on an entry-level crossover.

There's no excess of power, so you don't need AWD for extra traction.

These cars aren't necessarily meant to go off-road. And certainly not on stock tires.

It doesn't make the handling more secure on road. (because, again, there is no excess of power to cause massive understeer or oversteer)

It doesn't make the car brake better.

On the negative side, AWD is heavier and causes more driveline losses, which makes both fuel economy and performance worse than comparable FWD crossovers.

On the powerful Fozzie XT, AWD is a necessity. On the base Fozzie 2.0... no.

[Egan101]

I stand corrected in the sense that AWD is a liability for CUV's with something like 150hp.

However, other manufacturers make AWD a premium of sorts thus making such models to be priced higher than its entry-level FWD models. Even though most of them have less than 200hp, it is not a benefit then for such models to having AWD.

Will the new entry-level Escape FWD with its 1.6L Ecoboost engine rated at 178hp offer better value?

[Jun aka Pekto]

As someone who's driven both FWD and AWD vehicles in snowy winters, AWD makes a huge difference. AWD tend to have less slippage. AWD also makes it easier to deal with centrifugal forces while negotiating a curved road/or turn* (on a snow-covered road).

Of course, conditions are different in the PH. But, I imagine hydroplaning can be similar to snow on the road. AWD can come in handy even with 4-banger engines.

*If you like to drift, it's a thrill to see a FWD car lose traction on a turn. It's always a gamble whether you'll stay on the road or the centrifugal forces force your car to go off-road.... or into oncoming traffic. Either way, you'll get a few more gray hairs.

[sientobente]

Was CUV-hunting a few months ago and on my list were the Forester 2.0L, XV 2.0i, RAV4 2WD, Sorento LX crdi 2wd, CX-5 Pro and the CR-V. I ended up with the last one. This was because I found the other models too bare. Feature by feature, Honda gets more toys than the others. Like mine has cruise control, reverse camera, rear AC vents(only the Sorento and CRV has these I believe), lever for tumbling-down rear seats easily, MID LCD, programmable lighting and door lock settings etc.

Fuel consumption wise, Top Gear had a comparo of 4WD versions of the CX5, RAV4 and the CRV. What came out as the winner was the CRV. Another thing was, early this year I got to spend a month driving the Lexus RX350 in the states, the driving position of the CRV reminds me very well of the RX350. I actually call it the poor man's RX350.

Finally, what sealed my decision to get the CRV was the price. It was cheaper than the CX5 and the Forester which were on my final list.

[StockEngine]

Was CUV-hunting a few months ago and on my list were the Forester 2.0L, XV 2.0i, RAV4 2WD, Sorento LX crdi 2wd, CX-5 Pro and the CR-V. I ended up with the last one. This was because I found the other models too bare. Feature by feature, Honda gets more toys than the others. Like mine has cruise control, reverse camera, rear AC vents(only the Sorento and CRV has these I believe), lever for tumbling-down rear seats easily, MID LCD, programmable lighting and door lock settings etc.

Fuel consumption wise, Top Gear had a comparo of 4WD versions of the CX5, RAV4 and the CRV. What came out as the winner was the CRV. Another thing was, early this year I got to spend a month driving the Lexus RX350 in the states, the driving position of the CRV reminds me very well of the RX350. I actually call it the poor man's RX350.

Finally, what sealed my decision to get the CRV was the price. It was cheaper than the CX5 and the Forester which were on my final list.

Sir tell us about the oil change interval too and its cost hahahah.

[sientobente]

Sir tell us about the oil change interval too and its cost hahahah.

that is true sir, i also find honda cheaper to maintain(except for mazda of course) because the PMS schedule is every 10,000kms. My 11th-gen Altis already cost me close to 7k on it's first 5,000kms. While someone noted in HCP, that it only cost him around 5k for his first 10,000kms on his CRV.

my only problem is the CRV has an ugly rear when you look at it head on. the rear quarter view though does not look bad at all

[lowslowbenz]

OT:

Nagtataka ako sa inyo. Why is it that you people associate AWD with off roading kaagad.

Yes, in a way IT IS needed in off roading. But AWD (4WD) is also useful in situations wherein an ordinary 2WD SUV/CUV would burn rubber (glorious amounts of it) not to mention slipping and sliding, if just to climb a wet off ramp, say of a basement or elevated parking lot.

I've seen it before. Hence my decision to a 4WD SUV.

BTT:

I'd get the Subbie.

Too bad wala sila diesel.

[Wh1stl3r]

my only problem is the CRV has an ugly rear when you look at it head on. the rear quarter view though does not look bad at all

I happen to like the CRV rear end, it looks unique and gives a lot more space in the boot than CUVs with sleeker roof lines in the rear. For me it's one of the better looking offerings in this segment.

TS:
The 2 cars have a lot of features that are unique. From memory the Subie has auto leveling rear suspension and breakaway engine (goes down instead of into the cabin during a crash). The Nissan has active ride control and active trace control.

I still have the brochure somewhere.. It doesn't show all the features though.

[germs]

"mine has cruise control, reverse camera, rear AC vents(only the Sorento and CRV has these I believe), lever for tumbling-down rear seats easily, MID LCD, programmable lighting and door lock settings etc."

CX-5 also has these except for the rear AC Vents and programmable lighting.

[sientobente]

CX-5 also has these except for the rear AC Vents and programmable lighting.

the cx-5 really offered good value at that time and i like it's yojin3 program. the deal breaker for me why i didn't choose the cx-5 was the rear leg space. my line of work involves me to work part time as a driver and a GRO for foreign clients lol. this was also why the rear AC vents were a plus.

[niky]

Climbing a wet ramp isn't such a big deal in a FWD car. Even on an incline, the weight of the engine rests mainly on the drive wheels, giving you good traction. It's rear wheel drive cars with light rear ends (like low sedans, sports cars and most 4x2 pick-ups) that have a really hard time on ramps.

As someone who's driven both FWD and AWD vehicles in snowy winters, AWD makes a huge difference. AWD tend to have less slippage. AWD also makes it easier to deal with centrifugal forces while negotiating a curved road/or turn* (on a snow-covered road).

Of course, conditions are different in the PH. But, I imagine hydroplaning can be similar to snow on the road. AWD can come in handy even with 4-banger engines.

*If you like to drift, it's a thrill to see a FWD car lose traction on a turn. It's always a gamble whether you'll stay on the road or the centrifugal forces force your car to go off-road.... or into oncoming traffic. Either way, you'll get a few more gray hairs.

Hydroplaning, you tend to go straight on in a FWD crossover... not quite as dangerous as a RWD car. The big issue for Philippine users is mud... you won't get as much traction with FWD... but then, most crossovers don't have the tires to take on mud, anyway.

[Jun aka Pekto]

Hydroplaning, you tend to go straight on in a FWD crossover... not quite as dangerous as a RWD car. The big issue for Philippine users is mud... you won't get as much traction with FWD... but then, most crossovers don't have the tires to take on mud, anyway.

It's the same with packed snow and ice. The car continues to go in a straight line instead of making the turn, resulting in the car straying off the road. I'm lucky to have never been in that spot. But, I had a few close calls during my first winter in NY.

[Egan101]

I have had my share of winters in Upstate New York and in the western suburbs of Chicago. My scariest experience was when I lost traction with an 1997 Exped. The AWD was switched on but there was dry snow in the road. All the wheels were already covered with snow and the big hulking truck was sliding forward. I kept my calm, kept trying to control the truck and veered it away from the car in front of me. The big truck lurched into the side of the road and into the ditch. The truck automatically switched from AWD setting into 4x4 and the truck keep moving on into a mixture of dry snow and mud until it lost its forward momentum. Thank goodness! My wife, daughter, and I escaped a sure pile-up of cars if I didn't have the wits to veer the truck to the ditch. I do miss that old truck and the usefulness of its AWD in snow. However, AWD will not help you in dry snow and black ice as you lost all traction.

[StockEngine]

I have had my share of winters in Upstate New York and in the western suburbs of Chicago. My scariest experience was when I lost traction with an 1997 Exped. The AWD was switched on but there was dry snow in the road. All the wheels were already covered with snow and the big hulking truck was sliding forward. I kept my calm, kept trying to control the truck and veered it away from the car in front of me. The big truck lurched into the side of the road and into the ditch. The truck automatically switched from AWD setting into 4x4 and the truck keep moving on into a mixture of dry snow and mud until it lost its forward momentum. Thank goodness! My wife, daughter, and I escaped a sure pile-up of cars if I didn't have the wits to veer the truck to the ditch. I do miss that old truck and the usefulness of its AWD in snow. However, AWD will not help you in dry snow and black ice as you lost all traction.

AWD is helpful in snow or ice.....only when you have the right tires. Studded tires and AWD for Alaska that's for sure.