Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I like the look of the lower vehicle better (unless you need the clearance for deep snow). Crosstrek looks like it is sitting on the wrong wheels or something does not quite fit, kind of the way raised trucks look. I like the grill/front end of the imprenza better. Crosstrek reminds me of a British person with bad and missing teeth. I dislike the look of the Crosstek wheels. On the other hand the privacy glass is nice and the extra gear should result in better mpg. I do not know which transmission performs better or lasts longer, but I like have lots of gears in a manual - it is more fun. So there are a couple of points in favor of crosstrek, but to me, looks matter.
I would appreciate any input. I am shopping for a new car (yes, new--I don't want used).
I am overwhelmed with all the information--even the comparison sites. I only buy a new car every 9-10 years.
I am looking at the Honda HR-V, the Subaru Impreza hatchback and the Subaru Crosstrek.
Spouse has had two Honda Civics. One lasted 13 years, 250,000. He is on the second one now. Good cars--a bit noisy inside while driving down the highway. Everyone that I know that has a Subaru, loves them. I currently have a VW Beetle--she has been fun, but I want a better car for the Winter.
I live in an area that gets weather--snow. So I want an AWD. Usually I am the only one in the car. I drive to and from work, each way 30 miles. Highway--normally no traffic.
Subaru beats any Honda hands down for driving in inclement weather or snowy roads. They are both "A" manufacturers, so you can't go wrong either way.
The Honda will get better gas mileage, I'm sure (tht AWD cuts down on mileage), if that's an issue for you.
I had a Subaru Forester for 14 years. Hands down the best vehicle I've ever owned. I miss it. I had a bunch of things finally go wrong, so because of the cost to repair, I bought a new vehicle instead. I didn't get another Subaru because the Forester had changed so much (it was bigger, with more frou-frou stuff to appeal to socker moms, like a stupid skylight).
I've had a Honda Accord hatchback and Honda Fit. The Honda Accord was good, not great. The Honda Fit is an aces vehicle. I still have it, altho it was supposed to be a temporary vehicle for me. For the compact car it is, it is awesome.
SUBARU VS HONDA - other details.
Subaru is a more utilitarian vehicle. Simple interior, not the best audio system, etc. But its upholstery will likely to hold up to a lot of mistreatment & dogs. Subarus are very comfortable for the driver, IMO. Something about the placement of the driver's seat, the steering wheel, etc...makes for a VERY comfy ride for the driver. Good viewing out of the windows (I like that). Subarus may be a bit pricey to work on, and there are fewer places to service them in MY area.
Honda excels at interior. No maker is better at it. Nice quality dashes, great audio for hte price point, nice appearing upholstery. And Hondas have superior exterior paint jobs. It's just gorgeous and stays that way for years and years. But mind haven't been good in inclement weather or on snowy or icy roads. Close to the ground (not much clearance) for going thru dips in wet roads. Hondas aren't as cheap as American cars like Ford are, but cost less than Subarus to service, I think. You may want to check on that.
There's no shortcut. You have to wade through all the choices vs. the cost, and what you think will suit you long term. What matters most to me may not be what matters most to you.
They're both good makers of cars, though. Among the best in the world.
If AWD is a major consideration, I would go with the Subaru. Way better than the Honda, or any other AWD system. Definitely get the Eye Sight system if safety technology is important to you. I personally wouldn't buy a Subaru without it.
If you want Honda reliability and can stretch your budget a little bit, get an acura with SH-AWD. It has torque vectoring so really helpful in wet snowy conditions.
I would appreciate any input. I am shopping for a new car (yes, new--I don't want used).
I am overwhelmed with all the information--even the comparison sites. I only buy a new car every 9-10 years.
I am looking at the Honda HR-V, the Subaru Impreza hatchback and the Subaru Crosstrek.
Spouse has had two Honda Civics. One lasted 13 years, 250,000. He is on the second one now. Good cars--a bit noisy inside while driving down the highway. Everyone that I know that has a Subaru, loves them. I currently have a VW Beetle--she has been fun, but I want a better car for the Winter.
I live in an area that gets weather--snow. So I want an AWD. Usually I am the only one in the car. I drive to and from work, each way 30 miles. Highway--normally no traffic.
Out of the 3 you mentioned, I would be concerned with ground clearance with the Impreza. Now, with both the HRV and Crosstrek, personally I would choose the Crosstrek and this is coming from someone who owns an HRV. I love the look of the vehicle and the engine itself, but the fit and finish just isn't there. I've had the vehicle into the dealership for minor warranty work more than I care to count. Now, the important part being the drivetrain, it has been flawless. With snow tires (and even the all season) I've had no problems at all here in the Colorado snow.
Something else to think about is that the HRV is a 2015 design while the 2018 Crosstrek is a new redesign so chances are, the Subaru will have more bells and whistles. Simple stuff like, the HRV does not have Apple Carplay while the CT does.
Since you plan on keeping the car for roughly a decade, I really would go testdrive both of them to see which one you feel fits you best. People tend to focus on features and the like, but a lot of times, it is how YOU feel when driving a vehicle. You might like the look of the CT, but the seats might be uncomfortable for you.
I would appreciate any input. I am shopping for a new car (yes, new--I don't want used).
I am overwhelmed with all the information--even the comparison sites. I only buy a new car every 9-10 years.
I am looking at the Honda HR-V, the Subaru Impreza hatchback and the Subaru Crosstrek.
Spouse has had two Honda Civics. One lasted 13 years, 250,000. He is on the second one now. Good cars--a bit noisy inside while driving down the highway. Everyone that I know that has a Subaru, loves them. I currently have a VW Beetle--she has been fun, but I want a better car for the Winter.
I live in an area that gets weather--snow. So I want an AWD. Usually I am the only one in the car. I drive to and from work, each way 30 miles. Highway--normally no traffic.
I would also vote for the Subaru.
I have a 2013 Outback and as others have said, the AWD is excellent.
Subarus are definitely in their element in the snow, especially with a set of Bridgestone Blizzak studless tires.
However, I'm curious as to whether you have considered the Golf Alltrack since you are already a Volkswagen owner.
Back in March, I had test-driven an Alltrack with all-season tires and came away very impressed because it honestly handled the snow, slush, and ice as well as, if not better than my Outback with the fore-mentioned Blizzak tires.
Ultimately, I bought a new Tiguan in August but after all these months, I am still seriously considering trading in my Outback for an Alltrack because I am that impressed with its performance.
It depends upon how much snow through which you need to drive. If you are on unplowed roads with several inches of snow, the Subaru has a good AWD system. The interiors are quirky, though, and not as luxurious for the price point, which is why I am on the Volvo side of the debate with AWD wagons, though Volvo does not currently have a small AWD in the US, so that would negate Volvo.
The Honda system is a part-time AWD system, meaning it is a FWD wagon until the rear wheels slip, and then pumps activate the rear wheels as needed to regain traction and control. it is the same system used for years on the CR-V and Acura RDX when the RDX went from getting Acura's SH-AWD to the Honda-branded detuned AWD system. It works very well on plowed, slippery roads in all but the more extreme conditions, so if you are traversing regular suburban/urban roads with light snow cover and wet conditions, it may be a worthy consideration as operating costs are much lower than with Subaru.
The other thing to remember with Subaru is that they sell what they make, so you will pay MSRP or close, whereas you may be able to get a deal on a Honda, simply because of sales volume. The Impreza wagon scores highest on your list for safety with additional safety options from IIHS, higher than the Crosstrek and higher than the HR-V. However, the CR-V is a much more robust vehicle, especially in the small front overlap crash test, and I would look to it over the HR-V as it offers excellent utility and driving position in a compact crossover. You lose the higher driving position in the Impreza wagon, compared to a CR-V, but coming from a VW Beetle, comfort in that respect should not be much of a problem.
If you're set on the three cars on your list, I'd go with the Impreza wagon. Now, if you were looking at an Outback Limited wagon, I'd look at a Volvo XC70 first. But, if you're open to a CR-V, I'd look at that too, since it's not much larger than an HR-V as it's on the Civic platform, so still compact, yet offers more of what you would want in a crossover, i.e., cargo room and higher driving position being two popular considerations in that class.
__________________
All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players: they have their exits and their entrances; and one man in his time plays many parts, his acts being seven ages.
~William Shakespeare (As You Like It Act II, Scene VII)
Location: San Ramon, Seattle, Anchorage, Reykjavik
2,254 posts, read 2,738,942 times
Reputation: 3203
Quote:
Originally Posted by unit731
Subaru here tend to have expensive repairs when they get older or high miles on odometer.
Where is 'here' and which years are you talking about? A 2001 2.5l car is much different than a 2015+. I've put a town of miles on my 2015 and have had zero issues with it (other than the stock tires on the Outback - those seriously are terrible).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
