SHOWDOWN OF OFF-ROAD CUVS
CARS HAVE BEEN UPGRADED TO BE SUITABLE FOR BOTH URBAN DRIVING AND TRAIL DUTY
Clayton Seams: The Ford Bronco Sport Badlands and the Subaru Outback Wilderness are both off-road versions of their respective CUV models. Even though nearly all CUVS are marketed for their all-terrain capability, few can tackle a trail without a few changes because of their low-profile street tires, air dams for fuel efficiency and open differentials. But something new is happening — people are actually taking them off road.
Ford and Subaru have seen this enthusiast demand and have responded with the Badlands and the Wilderness, which both come upgraded for trail duty. In this comparison, we’re looking not only at how they are as weekend trail blazers, but also how easy they are to live with as weekday urban vehicles.
Brian Harper: At first glance, these two might seem like an odd comparison. The Bronco Sport Badlands is the compact, milder — but still rugged — sibling to the resurrected Bronco, a boonies-bashing brute with an iconic nameplate. The Subaru Outback Wilderness is a more capable and rugged version of the popular, midsize Suv/wagon. But both Ford and Subaru are targeting the same younger buyers with an “adventurous” outdoor lifestyle.
The vehicles have comparable base prices ($40,199 for the Badlands; $41,995 for the Wilderness), and engines (Ford’s 2.0-litre turbo four and Subaru’s 2.4-L turbo four), and fuel economy is a virtual tie.
The Bronco Sport is quite nicely equipped inside; not exactly luxurious but, frankly, I expected something more wash-and-wear utility. And the Wilderness is not hard to live with either.
CS: Life with the Wilderness isn’t exactly roughing it. The familiar Outback has been slightly lifted to accommodate 225/65/R17 all-terrain tires and it has some rugged bodywork. It also gets a cool black hood stripe to reduce glare off the hood, and builtin tie downs for a rooftop tent.
You’ll find special seats made from a wetsuit-like material. The interior detailing is excellent.
The 2.4-L turbocharged flat-four engine makes 260 horsepower and 277 poundfeet of torque, 15 more horses and two more pound-feet of torque than the Badlands. The only transmission offered is a CVT automatic with eight simulated gears. The Badlands comes with an eight-speed automatic.
Both get roughly the same mileage: The Ford nets 11.1 L/100 km city and 8.9 highway, while the Subaru gets 10.9 city and the same 8.9 highway.
BH: There are surprises in both. It was expected that the Wilderness is the smoother-riding crossover, thanks to its significantly longer (+473 mm) wheelbase, but it is also very competent on some seriously gnarly dirt, mud, potholed or water-filled roads. The Subaru has 22.5 mm more ground clearance than the Ford, though the Badlands’ shorter wheelbase and length give it better approach and departure angles. Still, both aced the offroad portion of our test, the Subaru Wilderness doing so with an enhanced version of Subaru’s X-mode system to complement the symmetrical all-wheel drivetrain. Conversely, with its short wheelbase, I thought the Badlands’ ride would be choppy — but it wasn’t for me. In fact, the ride was quite acceptable, and its handling had a sharpness that is exemplary for a small crossover. It was easier to drive off road — the Badlands has a sophisticated 4x4 system with a twinclutch rear-drive unit with a differential lock.
Our Badlands tester came with a $3,000 package that added nothing to the crossover’s dirt-flinging bona fides, but did make it far more livable: dual-zone automatic climate control, power sunroof, reverse-sensing system, Bang & Olufsen sound system, and more. That, and a couple of other things, boosted the as-tested price to $45,549.
CS: Both vehicles are perfectly capable of taking you into the badlands or the wilderness, but when push comes to shove, the Bronco Sport (with its shorter wheelbase and rear locker) will have the edge for ultimate capability. It also has better approach and departure angles and thanks to its shorter wheelbase, a better breakover angle as well. But the Outback is no slouch.
Both vehicles are very capable off road, but one is markedly better on the road. The Subaru Outback has a smoother ride, more power, slightly better fuel economy, more storage space, and a more usable rear seat than the Bronco Sport. And I think compromising a little bit of off-road capability is worth it for all these advantages. I give the Outback Wilderness my vote as winner of this comparison. What do you think, Brian?
BH: I really enjoyed the Bronco Sport and its youthful vibe. As an empty nester, not needing the additional rear-seat space, I could get used to looking at one in my driveway. Pragmatically speaking, however, I agree with all your points. Plus, the Wilderness has its own sporty charm. With the exception of an overly complex and crowded touch screen, it ticks too many boxes not to give it the win.