Compare the2024 Subaru OutbackVS 2024 Mazda CX-50

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-50 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-50 doesn’t offer a back seat reminder.

The Outback has standard Whiplash-Reducing Front Seats, which use a specially designed seat to protect the driver and front passenger from whiplash. During a rear-end collision, the Whiplash-Reducing Front Seats system allows the backrest to travel backwards to cushion the occupants and the headrests move forward to prevent neck and spine injuries. The CX-50 doesn’t offer a whiplash protection system.

When descending a steep, off-road slope, the Outback’s standard Hill Descent Control allows you to creep down safely. The CX-50 doesn’t offer Hill Descent Control.

Both the Outback and the CX-50 have standard driver and passenger frontal airbags, front side-impact airbags, driver knee 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.

Side impacts caused 23% of all road fatalities in 2018, down from 29% in 2003, when the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety introduced its side barrier test. In order to continue improving vehicle safety, the IIHS has started using a more severe side impact test: 37 MPH (up from 31 MPH), with a 4180-pound barrier (up from 3300 pounds). The results of this newly developed test demonstrates that the Subaru Outback is safer than the CX-50:

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 67 vehicles tested by the IIHS. The CX-50 is only a standard “Top Safety Pick” for 2023.

There are over 18 percent more Subaru dealers than there are Mazda dealers, which makes it easier should you ever need service under the Outback’s warranty.

To reliably power the ignition and other systems and to recharge the battery, the Outback has larger alternators than the CX-50:

J.D. Power and Associates’ 2023 Initial Quality Study of new car owners surveyed provide the statistics that show that Subaru vehicles are better in initial quality than Mazda vehicles. J.D. Power ranks Subaru above average in initial quality. With 18 more problems per 100 vehicles, Mazda is rated below average.

From surveys of all its subscribers, Consumer Reports’ January 2024 Auto Issue reports that Subaru vehicles are more reliable than Mazda vehicles. Consumer Reports ranks Subaru 1 place higher in reliability than Mazda.

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-50’s standard 2.5 DOHC 4-cylinder.

As tested in Car and Driver the Outback XT/Wilderness 2.4 turbo 4-cylinder is faster than the Mazda CX-50 turbo 4 cyl.:

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-50 doesn’t offer a boxer engine configuration.

On the EPA test cycle the Outback gets better mileage than the CX-50:

Regardless of its engine, the Outback’s engine automatically turns off when the vehicle is stopped, saving fuel and reducing pollution. If the conditions warrant or the driver wishes, the system can be manually disabled at any time for the duration of a trip. Mazda only offers an automatic engine start/stop system on the CX-50 Turbo.

To lower fuel costs and make buying fuel easier, the Subaru Outback uses regular unleaded gasoline. The CX-50 with the 2.5 turbo 4-cylinder engine requires premium for maximum efficiency, which can cost on average about 82.8 cents more per gallon.

The Outback has 2.6 gallons more fuel capacity than the CX-50 (18.5 vs. 15.9 gallons), for longer range between fill-ups.

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-50 (5 to 7). This means the Outback produces up to 8 pounds less smog-producing pollutants than the CX-50 every 15,000 miles.

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-50 doesn’t offer a CVT.

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-50 are solid, not vented.

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-50; it requires you to depend on a temporary spare, which limits mileage and speed before replacement.

For superior ride and handling, the Subaru Outback has fully independent front and rear suspensions. An independent suspension allows the wheels to follow the road at the best angle for gripping the pavement, without compromising ride comfort. The Mazda CX-50 has a rear torsion beam axle, with a semi-independent rear suspension.

The Outback has standard front and rear stabilizer bars, which help keep the Outback flat and controlled during cornering. The CX-50’s suspension doesn’t offer a rear stabilizer bar.

The Outback Wilderness executes Motor Trend’s “Figure Eight” maneuver quicker than the CX-50 (27.2 seconds @ .63 average G’s vs. 28 seconds @ .58 average G’s).

For greater off-road capability the Outback has a greater minimum ground clearance than the CX-50 (8.7 vs. 8.3 inches), allowing the Outback to travel over rougher terrain without being stopped or damaged. The Outback Wilderness’ minimum ground clearance is .9 inch higher than on the CX-50 Premium/Turbo (9.5 vs. 8.6 inches).

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-50 doesn’t offer active grille shutters.

The Outback has 8.7 cubic feet more passenger volume than the CX-50 (109 vs. 100.3).

The Outback has 1 inch more front headroom, 1.1 inches more front legroom, 1.9 inches more front hip room, 2.2 inches more front shoulder room, .5 inches more rear headroom, 2.7 inches more rear hip room and 3.8 inches more rear shoulder room than the CX-50.

For enhanced passenger comfort on long trips the Outback’s rear seats recline. The CX-50’s rear seats don’t recline.

The Outback has a much larger cargo volume with its rear seat up than the CX-50 with its rear seat up (32.6 vs. 31.4 cubic feet). The Outback has a much larger cargo volume with its rear seat folded than the CX-50 with its rear seat folded (75.6 vs. 56.3 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-50 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-50 doesn’t offer a hands-free gesture to open its liftgate, forcing you to put cargo down if your hands are full.

The Outback’s standard towing capacity is much higher than the CX-50’s (2700 vs. 2000 pounds).

The engine in the Outback is mounted longitudinally (North-South), instead of sideways, as in the CX-50. This makes it easier to service and maintain, because the accessory belts are in front.

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-50 doesn’t offer an exterior PIN entry system.

Manual rear side window sunshades are available in the Outback to help block heat and glare for the rear passengers. The CX-50 doesn’t offer rear side window sunshades.

Insurance will cost less for the Outback owner. The Complete Car Cost Guide estimates that insurance for the Outback will cost $400 to $3215 less than the CX-50 over a five-year period.

IntelliChoice estimates that five-year ownership costs (depreciation, financing, insurance, fuel, fees, repairs and maintenance) for the Subaru Outback will be $675 to $1630 less than for the Mazda CX-50.

Consumer Reports® recommends both the Subaru Outback and the Mazda CX-50, based on reliability, safety and performance.

The Subaru Outback outsold the Mazda CX-50 by almost four to one during 2023.