Compare the2025 Subaru OutbackVS 2025 Mazda CX-5

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.

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.

The Subaru Outback achieved a “Top Safety Pick” rating from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) for the 2024 model year. This recognition was based on its impressive performance in the small overlap frontal crash test, updated side impact crash test, headlight evaluations, and pedestrian crash prevention testing. The CX-5 has not yet been fully evaluated by the IIHS for 2024.

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-5:

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

J.D. Power and Associates’ 2024 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 49 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 92 lbs.-ft. more torque (277 vs. 185) 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 (256 HP engine):

	Outback	CX-5
Zero to 60 MPH	5.9 sec	6.8 sec
Zero to 80 MPH	9.9 sec	11.8 sec
Passing 45 to 65 MPH	2.8 sec	3.7 sec
Quarter Mile	14.6 sec	15.3 sec
Speed in 1/4 Mile	95.9 MPH	90.2 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.

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	Carbon/Premium Plus 2.5 DOHC 4-cyl.	26 city/30 hwy
		S/Select/Preferred 2.5 DOHC 4-cyl.	23 city/29 hwy
		2.5 turbo 4-cyl.	22 city/27 hwy

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. The CX-5 Turbo doesn’t offer an automatic engine start/stop system.

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.

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.

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

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.

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).

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.

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.

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. 29.1 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.

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.

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.

J.D. Power and Associates surveys of service recipients show that Subaru service is better than Mazda. J.D. Power ranks Subaru 7th in service department satisfaction (above the industry average). With a 16% lower rating, Mazda is ranked 14th.

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.

Insurance will cost less for the Outback owner. The Complete Car Cost Guide estimates that insurance for the Outback will cost $620 less than the CX-5 over a five-year period.

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.

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

The Subaru Outback outsold the Mazda CX-5 by 5% during 2023.