I will be buying a car in a week or two. I've spent the past month working out the cars I want and I have come down to 3 options which I would be reasonably certain I would enjoy owning.
I want you guys to tell me every bad thing you can think of regarding the Toyota Prius V, the Mazda CX-5, and the Subaru Outback.
WHAT PARTS OF THESE ARE SHITTY?
>>14877194
>Toyota
>>Prius
>SUVs
Think harder
>>14877206
the fuel economy of a Prius managed to keep it in the running.
all of these cars will be able to do what I need them to. and I somewhat like each of them for different reasons.
so I'm picking the one that has the issues I am most able to deal with, under the assumption that all three will have problems but that some will irk me more than others.
like the Toyota cruise control lever...FUCK THAT THING
how about different cars?
Subaru Crosstrek
Nissan Juke
>>14877277
I considered lots of cars so far, I've narrowed the list down to these three.
just picking whom to give the rose to.
>>14877206
looks like a wagon to me.
>>14877194
get the subaru
>>14877364
>get the subaru
reasons?
that AWD setup looks like it may be a bastard to maintain...
>>14877194
The CX-5 and Outback are good. The Prius V is an older model (based on the previous Prius), sucks to drive, lousy interior... you'd be better off just getting the new non-V Prius. Smaller, but it fixed some of the Prius's issues.
The CX-5 at least has some feel and feedback. Driving it can be entertaining.
The Outback has better AWD and a ton of space. No fun at all, though.
>>14877671
I agree with this guy
Prius is mehh
Other two are dece if they meet your specific needs, subaru will probably have better resale value in the long run but its a rather boring car fwiw
outback is a great car but the 2.5 flat four is terribly underpowered for how much the car weighs (4300-ish), but the gas mileage is good, if that's what your looking for
>>14877671
>better off just getting the new non-V Prius.
non-V prius was on the list till I found that it had insufficient cargo capacity.
>CX-5
that's the pull for me too, it's why it's still on the list
>No fun at all, though.
does it still go when I press the pedal? then it's good enough. besides, I have a fun car now, and it's not got what I need...
>>14877697
>better resale value in the long run
even 10-15+ years on?
>>14877739
does it come with a bigger engine?
or should I go with a different subaru like the forester?
>>14877697
>>14877671
>No fun at all, though.
>a rather boring car
as in it's slow or handles badly??
OP have you test driven the 3 cars yet? If not your a hermaphrodite. You pose a weird question. If you have been researching these 3 cars and test driven them you would know their faults and it would come down to personal preference.
Test drove a 2016 cx5 on the weekend. Was a fucking pleasure to drive. Driving fast our slow just felt so...comfy. Wife was sold on it so we're going to buy one. Grand touring trim.
But to answer your question, CX5; horse power seems low for that size vehicle, nothing special about the mpg if your going for AWD, also no android auto or car play...yet.
>>14879377
>OP have you test driven the 3 cars yet?
the CX-5 yes,
the Prius had to be brought in because I asked to see one, the Toyota dealer wouldn't let me drive it. I drove a crosstrek and a forester(but I didn't have any good opportunity to let loose with them.) the Outback seemed to have all the same features while being neither too bot nor too large.
>fucking pleasure to drive
I concur, I got a chance to drive that one as well and quite liked it. something about it seemed odd, and I would have preferred a more sturdy cargo tie-down arrangement.
after I examined the different trims for the cx-5 I decided that the touring would be what I got if I bought that make/model.
>actually giving me the negatives like I asked for
thank you for your input
>>14879433
Never drove a Prius but been a passenger in one quite allot. Dunno how the interior looks on the 2016's but it is what it is, a great mpg car. But not much more than that in opinion. Was very impressed spending a 12hour work day traveling in one the driver had a lead foot and spent most of the time doing 120+kmh and the gas tank was just not moving.
>>14878083
>>better resale value in the long run
>even 10-15+ years on?
Absolutely
>>14878083
subarus have a retarded ricer tax
>>14879492
>Dunno how the interior looks on the 2016's
for such a low car it's actually very spacious, one of the things I noticed and took a special interest in was the set of 4 big-ass heavy steel D-rings at the corners of the cargo floor, I'd understand that in the Mazda or Subaru they're high off the ground and tend to rock, but the rings in the subaru were all smaller, and the ones in the Mazda were plastic.
that plus the low lift height on the cargo compartment makes the Prius good as a take-down and capture car(I know some women with weird fetishes).
>>14879553
solid! whats the skinny on chipped paint?
>>14879558
a what now?
>>14877194
All crossovers are shit. Period. Get a wagon.
But if you really fucking need one, I would get the Mazda if you want a sportier more fun feel, or the Subaru if you need AWD. The Prius is literally shit tier faggotry
>>14880042
that was in no way helpful...
Its true what they say about the Subaru.
Its under-powered in the 4 banger trim. I was in a 2014 outback with a coworker and someone cut her off up a slight hill and she had to completely stop. She then mashed the gas pretty good and it was really pathetic how it basically had no go at all. Just no power.
The 2015 outback weighs 140 more pounds than the 2014 and the 2014 was the last year for a manual in an outback.
I dont see why you would buy one... you realyl cant tow, no power, no torque.
For Christ sakes... my 2015 jetta has a more powerful engine in both HP and torque... pathetic subaru.... pathetic...
>>14881997
>you realyl cant tow, no power, no torque.
getting one with the 3.6L V6 delivered is an easy option apparently
that said, am I better off buying a forester?
>>14877194
>WHAT PARTS OF THESE ARE SHITTY?
Every part of them. They're crossovers. They're shitty mall crawlers for upper middle class women. Buy a wagon
>>14882589
>not giving specifics
still not helping...
>>14880938
He's completely correct, dumbass.
>>14882596
Look, all three will be reliable enough. If you want to know about the interiors then ask for a test drive. But you'll still be happier with a wagon.
>>14882606
not in the context of this thread.
he is wrong by not pointing out exactly what is wrong with vehicles. he's simply stating them as all being bad. and not telling me useful information about the shortcomings of any of these models
>>14882622
I have test driven all of these except the Prius
>>14882298
Well thats was the whole point of my post, the 4 banger is not a good option.
The 6 is a fine option and should be the base engine. I would approve of a 3.6 outback.
>>14882809
good, so, barring the engine issue you'd recommend the outback?
do you have, or have you heard anything negative to say/said about the other two?
>>14882823
Being from Western NC I see almost exclusively only Outbacks and I dont think ive ever seen a Prius wagon. Ive also no experience with the Mazda.
Though, I will say the 3.6R Outback is very clearly going to be the most capable.
The Prius really is only for "Muh MPG's" while the outback is far more capable at the cost of MPGs.
If it were me id get the 3.6R Outback. My coworker may have had the 4 banger but that premium sound system was the best ive ever heard.
>>14882856
I live in rural south Texas, most cars can get by even on the shittier roads, that's why the prius is still on the list.
but I like the idea of being able to go to the beach occasionally and not get stuck,
priorities for the search went CargoCap, fuel Econ, Price, Terrain, comes in GREEN, Bells/Whistles.
power was not in my original search criteria...
>>14882924
>power was not in my original search criteria...
Shit, id still get the 4 banger Outback over the Prius any day of the week. Still far more capable.
And mid 30's MPG's highway isnt bad either.
>>14882939
with the bigger engine the projected MPG is something like 27/20 Hwy/city
>>14877370
It really isn't, the drivetrains are bulletproof. I'd say get the Subaru.
Get the 3.6 if you want more power, but the 4 banger is fine.
>>14877194
Test drive the Subaru and Mazda and buy the one that a better deal is offered on compared to how much you like it?
I like the Mazda myself. It has really nice brakes, fairly nice steeling. Drives better than virtual all sedans, let alone SUVs.
I like the Mazda interior too. It's nicely styled and comfy feeling without looking like an old yacht.
I also like how low the upkeep is on the Mazda. Fuel efficient, haven't had any repairs needed for 3 years. It's pretty unbelievably low cost of ownership.
But I wouldn't think it's bad to get the Outback if you drive both, like it, and are offered a better deal on the Outback.
>>14878083
>>14879433
They didn’t let you drive the Prius V because that would turn you off from buying it. It’s that bad. The steering feels like you’re driving a video game, there’s a very tenuous connection between the steering wheel and the front wheels. That matters most on high-speed gentle curves, like freeways through mountains. No confidence at all. On certain surfaces it seems to rock side-to-side. I didn’t think the seats were all that comfortable, either (if you can’t test drive it, at least sit in it for a while). Oh, and it beeps at you when you’re in reverse. It’s a horrible beep. The radio takes a million touch-screen presses to do anything with. I’d also say it needs more power to compensate for the added weight over the regular Prius.
The Outback is the practical choice here, and it’s a lot nicer inside than the Prius. It blows the Prius out of the water in almost every way, especially ride quality and noise.
I think you’re more likely to actually enjoy and fall in love with the CX-5 because of the way it feels, but that one is noiser than the Outback, and smaller.
Forget about the Prius and test drive the other two, then decide.
