HOW DOES THE SUBARU FORESTER XT MEASURE UP AGAINST THE HONDA CR-V?
CR-V underwent a full redesign this year while the XT is starting to show its age
Nick Tragianis: The Honda CR-V and Subaru Forester have more in common than you might think. Both have been around for two decades now, both are No. 2 sellers for their brand and now both come with turbocharged engines.
They also both play in the same, highly competitive segment, but that’s where the similarities end. The sales numbers paint a very clear picture: the CR-V is the de-facto choice in the segment, while the Forester is an underdog. Truth be told, it’s easy to see why. The Forester, particularly the XT trims, has one of the best all-wheel-drive systems in the business and it is deceptively quick, but the rest of it simply falls short. Especially considering the CR-V underwent a full redesign, inside and out, this year.
Brian Harper: Allow a Disney reference to describe the two: The CR-V is a beauty, the Forester is a beast — both relatively speaking. First, however, we have to insert the weasel clause. A more direct comparison would be the Forester XT Limited ($37,995) against the CR-V Touring ($38,090) or conversely, a CR-V EX ($32,990) versus the Forester XT Touring ($33,995). But we can only work with what’s available from the manufacturers.
That said, the fifth-generation CR-V is an impressive piece of work, the top-of-the-line Touring trim loaded with features and suitably upscale. A brandnew engine is offered across the model lineup: a turbocharged 1.5-litre four cylinder with 190 horsepower replaces the old, normally aspirated 2.4-L engine. Meanwhile, the Forester 2.0 XT Touring — with a mid-cycle refresh for 2017 — has a 2.0-L turbo four. With 250 h.p. on tap, that solidifies the Forester’s street hoodlum rep within the compact crossover segment. So I’m guessing, being a bit of a punk yourself, it’s the speedy Forester that has you salivating and not the mature sophistication of the Honda. Or am I in for a surprise?
NT: You’re not entirely wrong, but you’re not entirely right, either. The Forester is quick, hardly surprising given that its directinjected turbo four is basically a detuned version of the WRX’s engine. The standard CVT — also available on the WRX — has a split personality; it is smooth when moseying around town, yet it also does a formidable job keeping the turbocharger spooled up and power in the engine’s sweet spot when spirited driving is called for. All that, lumped together with taut handling (well, for a crossover) and I can’t shake the feeling the Forester XT is essentially a WRX on stilts.
Unfortunately, that’s pretty much where the honeymoon with the Forester XT ends. Yes, it’s quick. Yes, it has one of the best all-wheel-drive systems in the business. But there’s an overall sense of cheapness inside. The layout of the controls is logical and the visibility is absolutely fantastic, but the materials aren’t up to par. Wind noise is quite pronounced on the highway and the infotainment system — despite the refresh — already seems outdated. This, old dude, is where the CR-V blows the Forester XT out of the water, no?
BH: Excepting the performance aspect, I’d have to say yes. The CR-V is first and foremost a family-oriented compact crossover, one of what I have sometimes referred to as a suburban mall assault vehicle (SMAV). There’s nothing wrong with that; it’s a strategy that works exceedingly well for Honda. And it’s not as though the turbo 1.5 L is a slug; it’s pretty good for running around town on errands, though the engine can get rather growly under heavier acceleration.
Still, I have to wonder what it would be like loaded up with kids and stuff and heading for the hills. I do wish Honda would consider an optional engine choice, something larger and pushing 220 to 240 h.p., not so much for performance, but for utility. And yes, while the CR-V’s Real Time AWD system is a decent setup, the Forester deserves proper respect for its full-time AWD system, tops in the compact segment.
After that, the Forester is strictly function over finesse. Beyond the better quality materials throughout the cabin, the CR-V Touring’s copious standard mod cons — heated front and rear seats, heated steering wheel, remote engine start and a lot more — can’t help but impress.
NT: For sure. The CR-V is surprisingly refined inside, despite some quirks. I’m not big on the fauxwood trim running along the door panels, and some of the controls didn’t strike me as intuitive. I don’t like how Honda conceals most of the HVAC controls in the infotainment system. Still, it’s tough to knock the rest of the CR-V’s cabin. It’s quiet and more refined than the Forester, while the second-row seats and cargo area are both generously sized. Plus, Honda finally listened: the CR-V has a volume knob again!
All that said, it seems like both of our turbo CUVs are more or less tied for fuel economy. Despite the larger engine, I averaged 9.4 L/100 km with the Forester XT, at a 60/40 split between city and highway driving. Not bad.
BH: Fuel economy in the CR-V was about the same. I do have to say, kid, this comparison is not so much the Forester disappointing as the CR-V really upping its game in the segment with the new model. Subaru is just being Subaru, eminently logical and practical. The Forester is far sportier and would do better in actual off-road situations.
On paper, the two crossovers are quite close in overall size. There’s a bit more passenger volume in the Forester, as well as front-seat legroom. The CR-V counters with more rear-seat legroom and a larger cargo area.
By my way of thinking, although the two compete in the same compact segment, Honda and Subaru’s marketing outlook is different. Honda is trying to reach a much broader audience, while Subaru is preaching to its faithful.
NT: You know, picking a winner between these two isn’t easy. The Forester isn’t the hottest seller in the segment, but it is surprisingly quick and sporty, it boasts the superior AWD system and it’s easy to live with day-to-day. But in this segment, with more competitors stepping up their refinement and quality, the Forester shows its age. Especially inside.
That’s why I’m going with the CR-V. Its redesign has paid off nicely; the powertrain is commendably smooth and the interior, while not quite perfect, is plenty refined. No doubt about it, the redesigned Honda CR-V will still rule the segment.
BH: Mark this occasion: We agree. When it comes to compact crossovers, the new CR-V’s comfort, content and overall comportment make a better impression than the Forester XT’s on-road sportiness and offroad attributes. Now, up against Mazda’s newly revised CX-5, we’ll just have to see.