[columnshift]

tested a forester touring family LOVED IT

wife requires power lift gate 2014 crv doesn't have it
honda lacks ALL the safety that the forester has ---big deal for my wife

she agreed to test the 2015 crv BUT if no power lift gate no
the loves the cvt trans
so unless honda is tone deaf
they have to get 2015 RIGHT its hard for me to think honda
with 2 years to improve the crv
to have all the forester AND MORE
i check every day for 2015 info can't wait

 

[columnshift]

soooooo
nothing on features set for 2015 your thoughts
i'm looking at the 2015 forester touring for my wife
CRV MUST have to remain competitive (and they have had 2 years to get there)
better mpg
cvt
power lift gate
led daytime driving lights
push to start feature
pass ALL safety tests

now to exceed competition

bigger rear camera screen
better bluetooth integration ----eyes free siri, iPhone integration, even carplay (don't tease me)
a way to improve rear seating area
no change in $$$$ or include more standard features

what else to top the forester and others???-----

when do you think will be available, in show rooms to test drive??

any links you find to address the above PLEASE include

there ain't much out there except a few spy photos
thanks

 

[4e11]

Frankly I don't understand why people want a power lift gate on a car as small as the CR-V or Forester. In my opinion, there is really no problem with opening these lightweight lift gates. Probably just as easy as opening one of the side doors. What's next? Power side doors?

On a bigger SUV or minivan, I can understand the need for power lift gates and power sliding side doors, because the doors are larger and heavier.

 

[Grafarian]

Well, to us we don't really care for power liftgate although I confess when we first got the CRV, we are so use to the side door opening of the RAV4, that the first month of ownership someone in the household kinda hit there head a few times while someone else was closing the rear tailgate..

I think it is good for shorter people and for people who like the convenience of opening and closing from distances.. I haven't gotten lazy yet and still have to figure out how to open the doors while unlocking the vehicle vs smart key systems that will unlock when you touch the door handle with the keyfob nearby.. It is bad enough they got rid of the keyhole on the passanger side and trunk.. but most cars have alarm systems which you open with the key instead of the unlock on the fob is so annoying.. Lucky we don't keep anything valuable inside other then the owners manual and $2.00 worth of change for parking meters...

 

[columnshift]

isn't that with any consumer product?
there is a market like my wife that carries many things into and out of work and home, its a deal breaker for that consumer my wife WON'T buy a new car with out the features she feels important
consumerism at its best maybe make a model with and without that feature
i showed her lane watch---she was IMPRESSED she gets what she wants she has to live with it
not anyone else unless someone wants to follow her around and open the lift gate for her

 

[BaddaBing]

I purchased the new Forester Touring in Dec. I did my research and I was excited when my ordered Forester arrived. I drive 200-250 miles a day and I need a dependable, safe and comfortable vehicle. I loved the visibility, traction, large sun roof and the smooth CVT. The surprise was how uncomfortable the seat bottom was. I am 6 foot tall and 190 lbs and I have driven many vehicle and the Forester seat is bad. I was also disappointed in the out dated Nav/electronics package and the very slow power rear hatch. The rear hatch is so slow I quit using it and did it manually.
First time I owned a new car for less than a month. I needed a car quick so I got a 2014 CR-V. I have owned several Honda's and they have been great. The CR-V is much more comfortable on long trips and has a much better Nav system. The rear seat folding mechanism is also very nice. My recommendation is to drive both on as long a test drive as you can or rent one. I hope this helps.

 

[4e11]

My recommendation is to drive both on as long a test drive as you can or rent one.

Thanks. Anyone know where they rent Hondas? They don't seem available as rentals. Hertz sometimes has Subarus (mostly Outbacks), but I don't know if they have the Forester.

 

[wolf29]

Depends what area you're in. Some places may have them. You can look around or just call the big chains. I've seen them for rent in the Miami area one time I was there, but wasn't a chain rental place.

 

[streetmechanix]

honestly I don't thing the subaru can compete with the crv 2.4liter's oomph even in eco mode the crv doesn't lag where the forester does

 

[wolf29]

Happen to come across this video for anyone still looking to compare:

 

[columnshift]

the test drive is critical BUT these forums help you focus your attention if the sales person is with you they don't shut up to find the subtle changes you may have to do several test drives
my prob is my wife won't test a crv till they have one she could buy (all the equipment) to get the power lift gate we need the touring. she hated my sienna laser cruise control and these forums say you can turn it off and use the regular cruise (must confirm)

and crv touring can't open lift gate without the key fob so if I'm going to the garage with no fob, i have to open the car and press the hatch release.....hmmmm inconvenient but must confirm.

from what i hear the iPhone integration is better with honda BUT i could add carplay to forester

with the touring i don't need nav or some of the other stuff, 18 wheels make for a stiffer ride maybe switch out those

competition is great its wonderful we have the choices

now since the forester has been out long while maybe they have plans for early 2015 for some upgrades---maybe even carplay

if the dealer could install carplay or subarea offered it---bam i'd go forester

 

[vhercules]

I would look at it like this -
If you want a decent off roader with good ground clearance which doubles up as your daily driver and family hauler get the Forester !

If you want a very reliable SUV for hauling family, good cargo space, inexpensive maintenance, fairly decent all weather capability in snow and back roads then get a CRV.
The CRV has a bit of an edge over the Forester in terms of over all reliability.

I know people care a lot about creature comforts like power tailgate and lane watch but I believe the more gadgets you have the more the chances are for things to break and trips to the garage.

 

[Billhook]

I'm not sure the need for a power liftgate and a pushbutton start. I noticed no problem with the former and the latter is just silly - I'd rather turn a key, especially if the battery in my smartkey goes dead.

I started out looking at the Subaru and didn't mind the chintzy interior (it's a utility vehicle, not a bordello on wheels) or buzziness and actually like the boxy, no-nonsense looks of the '14+. What I didn't like was the problems they had when I was thinking about a WRX ten years back seem to still be present, like flimsy sheetmetal and bad paint. The seats, as mentioned, suck up front and I don't trust Subaru reliability, especially the CVT, which is okay because they offer a manual at the Premium level, which corresponds well to the EX trim I looked at for the CRV, and I'd actually prefer a standard shift with such wimpy engines as the Forester and CRV have in relation to their heft.

I ended up with an '15 EX-L AWD and don't really expect the capability deficit compared to the Subaru AWD system to be as much of an issue as the relative lack of dealers and major dearth of qualified independents to service the Subie are in relation to Honda. I like to read the posts of Tom & Ray Magliozzi on CarTalk and their vehicle reviews. One of the last ones they did was of the '14 Forester. Being from MA, they obviously see a bunch of Subies and one of their points is that if you wanted outstanding reliability, Subaru didn't have it and that you should go buy a CRV. I keep wanting to give Subaru a chance, but always find myself feeling reluctant the more I investigate.

 

[toast21]

I'm not sure the need for a power liftgate and a pushbutton start. I noticed no problem with the former and the latter is just silly - I'd rather turn a key, especially if the battery in my smartkey goes dead.

Have to disagree with you there on the pushbutton - in my cold climate with keys one has to take gloves off to rummage around in a pocket under a few layers to find them, but with the smartkey I don't have to do any of that. It's a creature comfort to be sure, but it does make a difference in allowing for a bit more dexterity to spare when taking things to the car.

Also note that the procedure for starting with a weak smartkey battery is on page 492 of the owner's manual.

Power liftgate didn't seem very useful to me unless in conjunction with a hands-free activation mechanism, as in e.g. the Escape Titanium.

 

[Beg E]

I am really not at all pleased with my CRV even though its a fully loaded EXL
Why didn't I think about a Audi 3 series for only $2000 more,because I did't Think.

 

[Billhook]

I am really not at all pleased with my CRV even though its a fully loaded EXL
Why didn't I think about a Audi 3 series for only $2000 more,because I did't Think.

I doubt you'll have as few problems with the Audi as the CRV, but it would be more fun to drive and more luxurious. Buy the Audi extended warranty and trade it before it's up.

 

[shelbycrv]

I would go with a Honda product over a Subaru any day just in my short experience, I owned a Subaru for about a week and only put 200 miles on it and then returned it for a full refund because the dealership had a 5 day 300 miles money back offer. I would of never purchased the car if I would of known the following about Subaru's in general. I'm just trying to alert others before they might make a wrong decision like I did, but I'm glad I did the right thing and now have my 2014 CRV.

High Oil consumption- needing to possibly add a quart of synthic oil every 1000-1200 miles. According to the Subaru service head mechanic, burning 1 quart of oil in 3000 miles is considered ~normal!. This means that it is considered normal to add 2 quarts of oil between oil changes. And this oil is not easy to find, so it's best to carry it with you, especially for trips.

Isn't burning oil hard on the engine? The Subaru service guy says that it is only things like engine misfiring that affect the catalytic converter to go bad.He said the technical service bulletins were only for oil rings for the Forester, and not for other models of Subaru and only for certain years, certainly not mine. He told me that with increased desire for fuel efficiency, engine design was changing such that engines burned oil now. He said to look in the owner's manual for the allowable levels of oil consumption in a Imprezza. I did, and it was 1.1 quarts in 1200 miles. Since oil changes are every 6000 miles for the Imprezza, this means Subaru thinks it is okay to consume up to 5 quarts of oil between oil changes!! That's a lot of oil to carry around. Especially for a BRAND NEW CAR!!! I know we are trying to have more fuel efficient cars, but burning this much oil is ridiculous and expensive and problematic, and that is when I returned the car.

I also disagree that it is normal, since I know other Subaru owners who do not have any issues with their Subaru's burning oil. It seems that this is an error in some engines and not others, but Subaru is sweeping those cars under the rug that do have the problem and saying those cars are just like the cars that don't burn oil, all normal and good. Plus Subaru has a class action lawsuit on the issue. Google it, it is all over the internet!

Subaru's might be a safe car but that's about it, and I do agree Honda's have there flaws like any car too but I was not about to be worried about adding oil to a brand new car you might as well own a junker if your going to have to do that.

 

[genuser]

If there is one reason I will never buy a Subaru, that would be the horizontal block/piston design ("boxer"). They claim it reduces vibration because the opposing pistons cancel out each others harmonics. I think those engines do not take advantage of gravity to get the oil back into the pan. So it remains in the cylinders and other places and could seep past the rings when the car is parked. It's no wonder they have problems with oil consumption. On top of that, on a 4-cylinder engine you need two sets of several parts - rocker covers, heads, cylinder blocks, cam shafts, timing chains, etc

 

[Billhook]

Supposedly Subaru had a batch of bad rings when they switched to their new motor design (which is supposed to not have head gasket issues). The crappy seats are what did it for me, not the possibility of burning oil. I have looked at Subaru several times and just never felt completely comfortable with them for issues like thin paint; tinny, easy-to-dent panels; manual transmission problems, uncertainty over their CVTs (and lack of a manual option), turbo issues, head gaskets, etc. They also require a lot of preventative maintenance and mechanics/dealerships are hard to find/inconveniently located for them outside of the NE, PNW, CO and Upper Midwest.