I test drove both but was not having them go head to head. I test drove the 25 Forester Limited. It was nice and pleasant, but not engaging and for the life of me, the seats killed my lower back. That stupid full touchscreen was such a distraction during the test drive. Subaru had zero incentives for lease, so I walked. Test drove a CX50 and my goodness, way more fun and definitely more of what I was looking for. Still cross shopping some others to be sure as I am in no rush The Forester has great value, safety, and versatility, and I wanted to like it but I just couldn’t.
It is almost as if Subaru was influenced style wise by the 2023 CX-50. Both have a more angular look than with previous models. The Subaru Limited deserves the 2.4 liter turbo as an option, while the CX-50 suffers from a less expensive rear suspension than the CX-5, so the Subaru would be better on rough forest roads. Both have dated, confusing infotainment. In normal commuting, both are fine with non-turbo engines, and can be had for under 35k in more basic trims. The CX-50s now have rebates as sales of the 2024 models have been slow. Meanwhile, the Forester has had a significant price increase for '25, but dealers in my area (Austin, TX) are already offering discounts.
Very thoughtful and through review of these two Japanes competitors. Will you be doing another comparison of the top of line Mazda CX50 and Subaru Forester Touring also? Few buyers go for base models. But in these two suv's one get quite bit of good equipment from both manufacturers. One problem one encounters is the for cuts for commercials, which is a new UA-cam annoying feature.
I prefer the Forester more than the CX50's.
But if I buy the Forester, I will get the Touring trim (Not Limited). It has 360degrees camera.
Who cross shops a cx50 and a Forester. They have nothing in common re target market
I test drove both but was not having them go head to head. I test drove the 25 Forester Limited. It was nice and pleasant, but not engaging and for the life of me, the seats killed my lower back. That stupid full touchscreen was such a distraction during the test drive. Subaru had zero incentives for lease, so I walked.
Test drove a CX50 and my goodness, way more fun and definitely more of what I was looking for. Still cross shopping some others to be sure as I am in no rush
The Forester has great value, safety, and versatility, and I wanted to like it but I just couldn’t.
It is almost as if Subaru was influenced style wise by the 2023 CX-50. Both have a more angular look than with previous models. The Subaru Limited deserves the 2.4 liter turbo as an option, while the CX-50 suffers from a less expensive rear suspension than the CX-5, so the Subaru would be better on rough forest roads. Both have dated, confusing infotainment. In normal commuting, both are fine with non-turbo engines, and can be had for under 35k in more basic trims. The CX-50s now have rebates as sales of the 2024 models have been slow. Meanwhile, the Forester has had a significant price increase for '25, but dealers in my area (Austin, TX) are already offering discounts.
Very thoughtful and through review of these two Japanes competitors. Will you be doing another comparison of the top of line Mazda CX50 and Subaru Forester Touring also? Few buyers go for base models. But in these two suv's one get quite bit of good equipment from both manufacturers. One problem one encounters is the for cuts for commercials, which is a new UA-cam annoying feature.
Cx50 real goood looking.
I've test drove both. Honestly, if you want comfort and city driving, CX50 is not for you.
These vehicles have nothing in common.
CVT no bueno
Mazda cx50 looks more expensive materials are more upscale.
Sad that Subaru's don't have front parking sensors