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.
Looks are subjective, but the Subaru Crosstrek is like a hatchback - it looks so different than the other small SUVs. It has too much of a slopping back. Personally, the Crosstrek looks ugly. SUVs should have a usable cargo space, and that means not have a sloping back like a hatchback.
Other publications have found offerings from Buick, GMC and Chevrolet at top of class for value and reliability yet CR consistently goes the opposite. Independent my hiney...
CR lost me years ago. They continued to push Honda/Acura as top reliability when several people I know, including me, continued to experience transmission problems in a variety of models from early on after purchasing new.
I owned a number of Subarus. However, 2012 was my last one since it "consumed" oil at an uncomfortable rate. I used to have to carry spare quarts of oil in the back since I drove 500 miles per week and was adding a quart about every 1000 to 1200 miles. Subaru said it was normal and I disagreed. Every other Subaru I had owned prior to that year the oil was just about at the full mark on its 4000 or 5000 mile oil change.
The problem was a common one and I believe the Crosstrek, among other models, was involved in a 2012 to 2017 class action law suit related to excessive oil consumption. CR glossed over this problem and continued to recommend it as a top pick.
CR lost me years ago. They continued to push Honda/Acura as top reliability when several people I know, including me, continued to experience transmission problems in a variety of models from early on after purchasing new.
I owned a number of Subarus. However, 2012 was my last one since it "consumed" oil at an uncomfortable rate. I used to have to carry spare quarts of oil in the back since I drove 500 miles per week and was adding a quart about every 1000 to 1200 miles. Subaru said it was normal and I disagreed. Every other Subaru I had owned prior to that year the oil was just about at the full mark on its 4000 or 5000 mile oil change.
The problem was a common one and I believe the Crosstrek, among other models, was involved in a 2012 to 2017 class action law suit related to excessive oil consumption. CR glossed over this problem and continued to recommend it as a top pick.
In 2009 I bought a new Forester MT (without a turbo, but had a manual transmission). Then with all the noise about head gasket problems, I could not trust this car. In 2011 I traded it for a 2010 RAV4 V6, and never looked back. Handed the key to my wife, who by the way, didn't like driving the Forester because the seat would give her backaches. That's the car she drives.
There are some class action lawsuits against three or so Subaru cars, including the Crosstrek. One of these lawsuits is in NJ, I believe. This one is about engine failure while the car is driven (or while the engine is running). The old close-deck Subaru engine was very reliable, but more expensive to produce. It was replaced with the cheaper open-deck design starting in the early '90s.
Great to know. People can at least now find them as there's eager buyers that have been waiting out there not wanting to order.
Or maybe no one wants them?!?
I have never seen such a fan boy on C-D. I'm glad you love your car but my god man.
I test drove a Crosstrek, a CRV and a Cherokee before I decided on my CX5.
If I had to rank these 4 cars the Crosstrek was dead last. And I know it actually isn't in the class of the others but I am shallow and self centered when it comes to cars. I chose 3 of these cars for one reason: I liked the way they looked. The 4th was the CRV and it was on my list ONLY because it was the best seller at the time.
Crosstrek = dead last. It was the worst in every category that mattered to me.
CX5
Cherokee
CRV
Crosstrek
Boring to drive, mediocre handling, less tech then the others even at the higher trims.
Knowing that I would be retiring to snow country, I really wanted to purchase a Crosstrek. When the dealer was showing me the car, we looked inside the trunk. "Where's the spare tire?", I asked. He said there was no spare tire, just an "inflation kit". I'm thinking that won't be much help if the sidewall gets sliced or fails, (which is a distinct possibility in rougher terrain).
No Crosstrek for me. Nor a Forrester or an Outback, (for different reasons). I went with an AWD RAV4, then AWD Highlander. Very happy!
I bought a Sport model for use in Hawaii. At age 65, it's the first new car I've ever owned.
My primary requirements were: Relatively small, good ground clearance for the unpaved, rough road I'm on and good MPG.
In comparison to my location in Alaska, a lot of driving is necessary here and gas is even more expensive.
So far I love it. There's also plenty of legroom for my 6'5" frame.
My other vehicle here is a '95 Nissan D21 4x4. They're actually about the same length, with Crosstrek being wider.
In Alaska I have a '97 LX 450. I've enjoyed owning several Toyota trucks and Subarus in the past.
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.
