Is Subaru on par/above/below Toyota/Honda as a brand?

[Anonymous]

They are all pretty much the same. Subaru has ewer bells and whistles. Toyota is pretty plasticy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Subaru > Honda > Toyita

I love how Subarus handle. Driving a Honda feels like sitting in a deep bucket driving an economy car. The beginning of the side window must be almost my chin level in some models. Weird. Toyota's are like driving a go kart with its long windshield and really loose handling. I'd rather drive anything than a Toyota.

LOL! How ironic.

Anyway, it would depend on what type of vehicle is being compared. If sedans, then Honda is way ahead of Subaru in terms of handling. Here's a recent comparison in which the Honda Accord's handling is described as "deftly tuned" and a "driver's car", while the Legacy is described as "conservative" and "boring". But hey, maybe you like boring.

Is a WRX STI not a sedan?

[Anonymous]

I would rank it as Honda -> Toyota -> Subaru, purely from a design, materials, and driving enjoyment perspective. There is little doubt that Toyota leads the pack in terms of reliability, and Subaru and Honda are probably quite evenly matched in terms of reliability.

IMO, Honda cars, both the exterior and interior, are more coherently styled, and the interior has better integration of soft-touch materials, textures, colors, shapes, and general ergonomics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Subaru > Honda > Toyita

I love how Subarus handle. Driving a Honda feels like sitting in a deep bucket driving an economy car. The beginning of the side window must be almost my chin level in some models. Weird. Toyota's are like driving a go kart with its long windshield and really loose handling. I'd rather drive anything than a Toyota.

LOL! How ironic.

Anyway, it would depend on what type of vehicle is being compared. If sedans, then Honda is way ahead of Subaru in terms of handling. Here's a recent comparison in which the Honda Accord's handling is described as "deftly tuned" and a "driver's car", while the Legacy is described as "conservative" and "boring". But hey, maybe you like boring.

Is a WRX STI not a sedan?

I don't think someone who describes Toyotas handling like go-kart is talking about a WRX STI. And if you are going to bring up the STI, then you need to compare it to the equivalent car in Honda's lineup, the Civic Type-R. Here's a comparison involving four cars, including the WRX STI and Civic Type-R, guess which car came in first, and which came in last.

https://www.motortrend.com/cars/honda/civic/2018/ford-focus-rs-honda-civic-type-r-volkswagen-golf-r-subaru-wrx-sti-type-ra-comparison/

I am actually a fan of Subaru, but you guys have no idea what you are talking about.

[Anonymous]

I've only had Hondas and Subarus. I like both for different reasons. At this point in my life (my son will be driving soon), safety wins out and that meant a Subaru.

Subarus are underpowered (also a good reason to buy it when you have a soon-to-be new driver). But they do what they need to.

My Hondas had better dashboard visibility but fewer bells and whistles in terms of accessories. I also had alternators fail early on both Hondas I have owned. And the one thing I wanted to avoid when my kids were little was breaking down on the side of the road.

My Subarus have had better rear window visibility.

I can't speak to Toyotas, but Toyota owns part of Subaru and there definitely is some engineering overlap between the two brands.

[Anonymous]

Well it’s settled. Lock the thread.

[Anonymous]

Subaru is a cult...and I’m totally in it.

[Anonymous]

For SUVs, we test drove the CRV and RAV, and bought a Forester. I find it very comfortable to drive but wish it was a true 5-seater: the middle seat is a joke.

We also have a Toyota sedan, our second. I know people say they are reliable but I have had nothing but problems and won't buy another. I also don't like driving it as much as the Forester (but, admittedly, it's an older car with fewer features).

I have had no reliability issues with the Forester but do feel like it's overmarketed. I think for our next car we will shop around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are all pretty much the same. Subaru has ewer bells and whistles. Toyota is pretty plasticy.

Toyota is a little plastic-y. Great value & it will last a long time, but in terms of handling and nice interior Subaru is a step up.

[Anonymous]

I love Toyotas. I am someone who drives cars forever. I’ve owned 3 Toyotas, two for 10+ years, and it’s amazing how they last. Also super cheap to fix, which, if you keep them forever, is handy. You never have to wait around on a part, or pay through the nose for something specialty. I always recommend toyotas to people who just don’t want to worry or think about their car. Particularly great as a first car and in your 20s— just get the oils checked regularly and keep it clean, and it will do right by you.

That said, when we had a kid, we bought a Subaru. It’s not just the safety features, although those are great. It’s also that they are very practical family cars, especially the wagons. We wound up with an Outback, but I also really loved the Impreza hatchback we test drove and I was impressed by how roomy it felt. I personally don’t like the new Forester (too big, it’s basically an SUV, which is not for me), but I liked the older, smaller version that was boxier. Just great family cars.

I don’t know anything about Hondas. Not on my radar.

[Anonymous]

on par

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Subaru’s are so miserably underpowered with their base level engines

This was my experience as well. I had intended to get a Subaru last year to replace a mid-2000s Accord, but their acceleration was terrible. (Old Accord was still going strong with no issues, but I wanted something with more modern safety features and a display.) The old Honda had more pickup and horsepower than the Crosstrek or the Foresters. I ended up with another Accord and very happy with it. Our other vehicle is a Sienna, which has been nearly as reliable as the Accord (two pricer repairs in 10 years to the old Accord's zero in 15) and easy to drive.

I kind of put them all in the same bucket, though the Subaru people are more into the brand than the others.

[Anonymous]

We were loyal Toyota customers for years, but I leased a Honda Pilot when the new model came out in 2016 - chose it over the Highlander because of the bigger trunk and more legroom in the 3rd row. Things started to fall apart after 2 years and I couldn’t wait to turn it in. I considered a Highlander again, but checked out the Subaru ascent and was sold. It’s a fantastic car, with great safety features standard and way better value than Toyota. I know there is some concern about long term reliability, but since I lease it’s not an issue for me.

[Anonymous]

I too liked the Ascent but couldn’t get past the reputation of the...type of person...who drives Subarus. Toyota for me.

[Anonymous]

I owened a Subaru and the head gasket blew at 75k miles. Based on this experience alone, I would say: Toyota > Honda > Subaru.

When anyone asks me about a Subaru, I never recommend it. The best part about a Subaru is that it's got all wheel drive. I was able to use it when there was snow on the ground and go places that other cars couldn't reach. In some situations, cars were stuck and I was driving along just fine. This is why they're so popular in places like Colorado. Of course, Colorado is very different than the DC Metro area. We haven't had much snow the last couple of years and even when we do, it's not that hard to just stay home. We rarely have massive snowstorms and the roads are typically cleared after a day or two. So outside of a mountainous area, I just don't see why anyone would choose Subaru.