Mazda
CX-5
Subaru
Forester
Mazda CX-5 vs Subaru Forester: 2025 Comparison
The short answer
Based on available data, the Subaru Forester comes out ahead of the Mazda CX-5 on power. Check the specs table and owner sentiment below for the full comparison before deciding between the two. Both are covered by real owner reports on CarWizz.
Specs side by side
What owners say
CX-5
Overall
The sentiment is predominantly positive, with the CX-5 consistently praised for its reliability, premium interior feel, and engaging driving dynamics. It is frequently cited as a top recommendation for buyers seeking a dependable, well-built compact SUV. Owners appreciate its refined interior materials, which are often described as superior to mainstream competitors, and its handling, which is noted to be more car-like and enjoyable than many rivals.
Best version to buy
The consensus favors models equipped with the naturally aspirated 2.5L engine for its proven reliability, though the turbo variant is acknowledged for its added power. For used models, there is a strong preference for vehicles without Cylinder Deactivation (often found in non-turbo models from certain years) due to concerns about added complexity.
Known issues
- ⚠• **Infotainment interface dissatisfaction**: Lack of touchscreen (pre-2026) criticized as slower and less intuitive; the new 2026 touchscreen is criticized by owners who preferred the previous rotary dial system.
Forester
Overall
Overwhelmingly positive sentiment across multiple generations, with the Forester consistently praised for its practicality, safety, all-weather capability, and long-term reliability when properly maintained. Owners express deep satisfaction with the vehicle's spacious interior, excellent outward visibility, and the effectiveness of its standard all-wheel-drive system in snow and poor weather conditions. The vehicle is frequently described as a dependable, no-nonsense family hauler and outdoor companion.
Best version to buy
For the 2019-2024 generation, the Premium trim is frequently cited as the "sweet spot" for comfort, convenience, and price, especially when purchased used. For the new 2025+ generation, the hybrid model is specifically recommended by some owners due to its different (non-CVT) transmission and improved technology.
Known issues
- ⚠CVT transmission longevity concerns: Concerns about long-term reliability beyond 100,000 miles, with strong owner consensus recommending proactive fluid changes every 30,000-60,000 miles despite some manufacturer guidance.
- ⚠Infotainment system glitches: Occasional screen freezes, slow response, or connectivity issues. Noted as an annoyance but not a dealbreaker. Frequency: recurrent.
- ⚠Windshield/glass cracking: Described as an "Achilles' heel"; prone to cracks and chips, necessitating comprehensive glass insurance. Frequency: recurrent.
The verdict
The Subaru Forester is the better choice for most buyers.
It has more power on its best-equipped version than the Mazda CX-5, based on the data above. If efficiency matters more to you than outright power, the Mazda CX-5 is worth a closer look instead.
Explore further
Common problems by model year
Not sure which one fits you?
Answer a few questions and get a personalized recommendation.
Frequently asked questions
Which is more reliable, the Mazda CX-5 or the Subaru Forester?
Owner reports show similar reliability sentiment for the Mazda CX-5 and the Subaru Forester. Check the known issues listed above for specific differences between the two.
Which is better for families, the Mazda CX-5 or the Subaru Forester?
Data on family-specific factors like cargo space is limited for one or both models, but based on available reports, both are positioned as practical daily drivers. Check the specs table above for seating and body type.
Which has better fuel economy, the Mazda CX-5 or the Subaru Forester?
Fuel consumption data is limited for one or both models. Check the specs table above for the figures available on each catalogued version.
Which is cheaper to maintain, the Mazda CX-5 or the Subaru Forester?
Exact maintenance costs aren't in our data, but reliability signals above are the closest proxy: fewer reported issues generally means lower repair costs over time.