Compare the2023 Subaru OutbackVS 2023 Mazda CX-5

Safety
Warranty
Reliability
Engine
Fuel Economy and Range
Environmental Friendliness
Transmission
Brakes and Stopping
Tires and Wheels
Suspension and Handling
Chassis
Passenger Space
Cargo Capacity
Towing
Servicing Ease
Ergonomics
Economic Advantages
Recommendations

Safety

© 1999 - 2024Advanta-STAR Automotive Research, all rights reserved. This vehicle comparison and all of the content in it are provided only by license from Advanta-STAR Automotive Research Corporation of America (“Advanta-STAR”). If you are not a legally licensed user of this vehicle comparison, it is against federal law to access it, copy it, forward it, or use it in any manner whatsoever. Any unauthorized use of this vehicle comparison is a violation of U.S. and international law and is punishable criminally and civilly. Removal of this watermark/notification without prior written license and approval received from Advanta-STAR is an agreement, understanding, and/or stipulation by the person(s), entities, agents, attorneys, and any other persons involved in the removal of this watermark/notification (including but not limited to Search Optics, LLC and any and all parent entities, sister entities, and subsidiary entities of Search Optics, LLC and/or any other entity, agent, attorney, and persons related in any manner to Search Optics, LLC) to: 1) an agreed upon amount of liquidated monetary damages of a minimum of $1,250,000.00 US Dollars in favor of Advanta-STAR; 2) the jurisdiction and enforcement of any legal claims associated with this matter asserted by Advanta-STAR in the United States Federal District Court in Portand, Oregon; and 3) service of process of any legal claims asserted by Advanta-STAR associated with this matter may be accomplished by First-Class Postage by the United States Postal Service or comparable service. XPYNN-M34HG 2a06:98c0:3600::103 2024/12/21

For enhanced safety, the front and rear seat shoulder belts of the Subaru Outback have pretensioners to tighten the seatbelts and eliminate dangerous slack in the event of a collision and force limiters to limit the pressure the belts will exert on the passengers. The Mazda CX-5 doesn’t offer pretensioners for its rear seat belts.

In the past twenty years hundreds of infants and young children have died after being left in vehicles, usually by accident. When turning the vehicle off, drivers of the Outback are reminded to check the back seat if they opened the rear door before starting out. The CX-5 doesn’t offer a back seat reminder.

The Subaru Outback has a standard driver’s side knee airbag mounted low on the dashboard. The knee airbag helps prevent the driver from sliding under the seatbelts or the main frontal airbag; this keeps the driver better positioned during a collision for maximum protection. A knee airbag also helps keep the legs from striking the dashboard, preventing knee and leg injuries in the case of a serious frontal collision. The CX-5 doesn’t offer knee airbags.

When descending a steep, off-road slope, the Outback’s standard Hill Descent Control allows you to creep down safely. The CX-5 doesn’t offer Hill Descent Control.

Both the Outback and the CX-5 have standard driver and passenger frontal airbags, front side-impact airbags, side-impact head airbags, height adjustable front shoulder belts, four-wheel antilock brakes, all wheel drive, traction control, electronic stability systems to prevent skidding, crash mitigating brakes, daytime running lights, lane departure warning systems, rearview cameras, available blind spot warning systems, rear parking sensors, rear cross-path warning and driver alert monitors.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does 35 MPH front crash tests on new vehicles. In this test, results indicate that the Subaru Outback is safer than the Mazda CX-5:

	Outback	CX-5
	Driver
STARS	5 Stars	5 Stars

New test not comparable to pre-2011 test results. More stars = Better. Lower test results = Better.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does side impact tests on new vehicles. In this test, which crashes the vehicle into a flat barrier at 38.5 MPH and into a post at 20 MPH, results indicate that the Subaru Outback is safer than the Mazda CX-5:

	Outback	CX-5
	Front Seat
STARS	5 Stars	5 Stars
HIC	28	81
Chest Movement	.5 inches	.5 inches
Abdominal Force	101 lbs.	126 lbs.
	Rear Seat
STARS	5 Stars	5 Stars
HIC	116	208
Spine Acceleration	51 G’s	65 G’s
	Into Pole
STARS	5 Stars	5 Stars
HIC	146	449

New test not comparable to pre-2011 test results. More stars = Better. Lower test results = Better.

For its performance in IIHS driver-side and passenger-side small overlap frontal, moderate overlap frontal, updated side impact, headlight, daytime pedestrian crash prevention, and nighttime pedestrian crash prevention testing, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety grants the Outback its highest rating: “Top Safety Pick Plus” for 2023, a rating granted to only 29 vehicles tested by the IIHS. The CX-5 is only a standard “Top Safety Pick” for 2023.

Warranty

There are over 16 percent more Subaru dealers than there are Mazda dealers, which makes it easier should you ever need service under the Outback’s warranty.

Reliability

To reliably power the ignition and other systems and to recharge the battery, the Outback has larger alternators than the CX-5:

	Outback	CX-5
Standard Alternator	150 amps	100 amps
Optional Alternator	190 amps	150 amps

Engine

The Outback XT/Wilderness’ standard 2.4 turbo 4-cylinder produces 73 more horsepower (260 vs. 187) and 91 lbs.-ft. more torque (277 vs. 186) than the CX-5’s standard 2.5 DOHC 4-cylinder.

As tested in Motor Trend the Outback 2.5i 2.5 DOHC 4-cylinder is faster than the Mazda CX-5 4 cyl.:

	Outback	CX-5
Zero to 60 MPH	8.6 sec	8.7 sec
Speed in 1/4 Mile	83.9 MPH	78.3 MPH

As tested in Motor Trend the Outback XT/Wilderness 2.4 turbo 4-cylinder is faster than the Mazda CX-5 (250 HP engine):

	Outback	CX-5
Zero to 60 MPH	5.9 sec	6.4 sec
Quarter Mile	14.6 sec	14.9 sec
Speed in 1/4 Mile	95.9 MPH	93.6 MPH

The flat cylinder configuration of the boxer engine in the Outback lowers its center of gravity, enhancing handling stability (That’s why Porsche uses boxer engines.). The CX-5 doesn’t offer a boxer engine configuration.

Fuel Economy and Range

On the EPA test cycle the Outback gets better mileage than the CX-5:

			MPG
Outback
	AWD	2.5 DOHC flat-4	26 city/32 hwy
		XT 2.4 turbo flat-4	22 city/29 hwy
CX-5
	AWD	2.5 DOHC 4-cyl.	24 city/30 hwy
		2.5 turbo 4-cyl.	22 city/27 hwy

In heavy traffic or at stoplights the Outback’s engine automatically turns off when the vehicle is stopped, saving fuel and reducing pollution. The engine is automatically restarted when the driver gets ready to move again. If the conditions warrant or the driver wishes, the system can be manually disabled at any time for the duration of a trip. The CX-5 doesn’t offer an automatic engine start/stop system.

To lower fuel costs and make buying fuel easier, the Subaru Outback uses regular unleaded gasoline. The CX-5 with the 2.5 turbo 4-cylinder engine requires premium for maximum efficiency, which can cost 20 to 55 cents more per gallon.

The Outback has 3.2 gallons more fuel capacity than the CX-5 (18.5 vs. 15.3 gallons), for longer range between fill-ups.

Environmental Friendliness

In its Green Vehicle Guide, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rates the Subaru Outback higher (6 to 7 out of 10) than the Mazda CX-5 (5 to 7). This means the Outback produces up to 8 pounds less smog-producing pollutants than the CX-5 every 15,000 miles.

Transmission

The Outback has a standard continuously variable transmission (CVT). With no “steps” between gears, it can keep the engine at the most efficient speed for fuel economy, or keep it at its peak horsepower indefinitely for maximum acceleration. The CX-5 doesn’t offer a CVT.

Brakes and Stopping

For better stopping power the Outback’s standard front brake rotors are larger than those on the CX-5:

	Outback	CX-5
Front Rotors	12.4 inches	11.7 inches

The Outback’s standard front and rear disc brakes are vented to help dissipate heat for shorter stops with less fading. The rear discs on the CX-5 are solid, not vented.

The Outback stops much shorter than the CX-5:

	Outback	CX-5
60 to 0 MPH	125 feet	136 feet	Motor Trend

Tires and Wheels

The Outback Wilderness/Onyx XT has a standard full size spare tire so a flat doesn’t interrupt your trip. A full size spare isn’t available on the CX-5; it requires you to depend on a temporary spare, which limits mileage and speed before replacement.

Suspension and Handling

For a smoother ride and more stable handling, the Outback’s wheelbase is 1.9 inches longer than on the CX-5 (108.1 inches vs. 106.2 inches).

The Outback Limited handles at .79 G’s, while the CX-5 pulls only .77 G’s of cornering force in a Motor Trend skidpad test.

The Outback Wilderness executes Motor Trend’s “Figure Eight” maneuver 1.3 seconds quicker than the CX-5 (27.2 seconds @ .63 average G’s vs. 28.5 seconds @ .58 average G’s).

For greater off-road capability the Outback has a 1.1 inches greater minimum ground clearance than the CX-5 (8.7 vs. 7.6 inches), allowing the Outback to travel over rougher terrain without being stopped or damaged. The Outback Wilderness’ minimum ground clearance is 1.6 inches higher than on the CX-5 Carbon/Premium/Turbo (9.5 vs. 7.9 inches).

Chassis

The front grille of the Outback 2.5i uses electronically controlled shutters to close off airflow and reduce drag when less engine cooling is needed. This helps improve highway fuel economy. The CX-5 doesn’t offer active grille shutters.

Passenger Space

The Outback has 5.4 cubic feet more passenger volume than the CX-5 (109 vs. 103.6).

The Outback has .4 inches more front headroom, 1.8 inches more front legroom, .3 inches more front hip room, 1 inch more front shoulder room, .1 inches more rear headroom and 2.6 inches more rear shoulder room than the CX-5.

Cargo Capacity

The Outback has a much larger cargo volume with its rear seat up than the CX-5 with its rear seat up (32.6 vs. 30.8 cubic feet). The Outback has a much larger cargo volume with its rear seat folded than the CX-5 with its rear seat folded (75.6 vs. 59.3 cubic feet).

A standard locking glovebox (which can’t be accessed with the valet key) keeps your small valuables safer in the Outback. The CX-5 doesn’t offer locking storage for small valuables.

To make loading groceries and cargo easier when your hands are full, the Outback’s liftgate can be opened just by holding your hand near the emblem on the trunk, leaving your hands completely free. The CX-5 doesn’t offer a hands-free gesture to open its liftgate, forcing you to put cargo down if your hands are full.

Towing

The Outback’s standard towing capacity is much higher than the CX-5’s (2700 vs. 2000 pounds). Maximum trailer towing in the Mazda CX-5 is only 2000 pounds. The Outback offers up to a 3500 lbs. towing capacity.

Servicing Ease

The engine in the Outback is mounted longitudinally (North-South), instead of sideways, as in the CX-5. This makes it easier to service and maintain, because the accessory belts are in front.

Ergonomics

In case you lock your keys in your vehicle, or don’t have them with you, you can let yourself in using the Outback’s available exterior PIN entry system (not available on Outback Base). The CX-5 doesn’t offer an exterior PIN entry system.

The Outback’s power window, power lock, power mirror and cruise control switches are lit from behind, making them plainly visible and easier to operate at night. The CX-5’s power mirror switches are unlit, making them difficult to find at night and operate safely.

Manual rear side window sunshades are available in the Outback to help block heat and glare for the rear passengers. The CX-5 doesn’t offer rear side window sunshades.

When the Outback Limited/Touring is put in reverse, both rearview mirrors tilt from their original position. This gives the driver a better view of the curb during parallel parking maneuvers. Shifting out of reverse puts the mirrors into their original positions. The CX-5’s mirrors don’t automatically adjust for backing.

The Outback’s optional rear and side view mirrors have an automatic dimming feature. These mirrors can be set to automatically darken quickly when headlights shine on them, keeping following vehicles from blinding or distracting the driver. The CX-5 offers an automatic rear view mirror, but its side mirrors don’t dim.

Economic Advantages

Insurance will cost less for the Outback owner. The Complete Car Cost Guide estimates that insurance for the Outback will cost $590 less than the CX-5 over a five-year period.

The Outback will cost the buyer less in the long run because of its superior resale value. The IntelliChoice estimates that the Outback will retain 52.14% to 55.07% of its original price after five years, while the CX-5 only retains 50.99% to 51.37%.

According to The Car Book by Jack Gillis, the Outback is less expensive to operate than the CX-5 because typical repairs cost less on the Outback than the CX-5, including $198 less for a muffler, $135 less for fuel injection and $130 less for a power steering pump.

IntelliChoice estimates that five-year ownership costs (depreciation, financing, insurance, fuel, fees, repairs and maintenance) for the Subaru Outback will be $1410 to $3788 less than for the Mazda CX-5.

Recommendations

Consumer Reports® recommends both the Subaru Outback and the Mazda CX-5, based on reliability, safety and performance.

See Available Inventory