Automotive

First Car: 2014 Subaru Crosstrek or 2016 HR-V

  • Last Updated:
  • Jul 5th, 2019 5:57 pm
Newbie
Jun 26, 2019
10 posts
6 upvotes

First Car: 2014 Subaru Crosstrek or 2016 HR-V

Hey Folks,

I'm a long time lurker, first time poster and I'm looking to buy my first car this weekend and I landed on 2 fairly decent deals. Both of them cost ~$16,000 CAD. I do 60/40 city driving and plan to take the car to the mountains for snowboarding and camping in the summer. I could really use some advice from those who deal with these purchases more often than me. Here's what I've gathered...

2016 Honda HR-V EX 2WD - 113,000KM
Pros:
• More Fuel Efficient
• Better Cargo Space
• 2WD = Cheaper Maintenance and Fewer things to break
• Better features (Back-up Camera, Sunroof, Lane Watch, Start Button Start, modern headunit)

Cons:
• SLOW (I understand that this neither of these cars will win any races) but this has 127 Torque vs Subaru's 138
• This is subjective - but it's not as good looking as the Crosstrek
• No warranty
• Higher Mileage

2) 2014 Subaru Crosstrek - Touring (In Canada this is the most basic trim) - 73,000 KM
Pros:
• AWD
• More powerful engine
• ~25,000 miles less than the HR-V
• Better looking than the HR-V
• Has the extended CVT warranty for 2 more years
• Safer (according to IIHS)

Cons:
• More Costly to maintain
• Higher Fuel usage due to the AWD
• Much more basic
• I'll have to add a few out of pocket expenses (add a new head-unit and backup camera)

I plan to keep the vehicle for ~2 more years until I'm ready to settle down with my GF and start a family. Then we will be getting something bigger.

I know these two cars may not be the RFD ideal choices (sorry but the 1997 beige corolla is out of the question). The reason I chose those two vehicles is because I'm used to driving in a higher vehicle as our family always had SUVs and out of all of the other "Sub-Compact" cars these two are either the largest ones or are known to be reliable.

Thanks for all of your help! :)
16 replies
Member
May 30, 2011
265 posts
31 upvotes
North York
Although I am owner of Subaru I would pick the 2016 Honda HR-V EX 2WD - 113,000KM, the high mileage may be a concern but I pick the later model of 2016 vs 2014 Subaru Crosstrek. 2014 is the old model.
But the price for both is not bad.
I would agree the Subaru is a bit safer. If it is also a 2016 Subaru, I will certainly pick it, but for 2014, it is hard to pick.
But if you just keep for 2 years, then I would pick Subaru, my choice only.
Sr. Member
Sep 25, 2018
969 posts
1987 upvotes
I'd pick the Subaru. 40k KM is quite significant difference.

Have you test drive the cars? Which one do you like driving in?
Before you speak: THINK
T = is it True? H = is it Helpful? I = is it Inspiring? N = is it Necessary? K = is it Kind?
Member
Oct 24, 2018
384 posts
365 upvotes
The only extra maintenance cost of the Subaru awd I can think of is changing the rear diff fluid every 100,000km or 60 months.
Deal Expert
Jan 15, 2006
21392 posts
23732 upvotes
Richmond Hill
The suby no question. The HRV is a cruel joke. It's a jacked up Fit.
Member
Apr 12, 2009
466 posts
115 upvotes
Pick the Subaru. Both are slow but at least with the Subaru you will have awd. If you plan on driving to the mountains it will certainly help. Budget for a rack as they both basically a hatchback and you will have no place for skis/boards if you have passengers
Deal Fanatic
Apr 5, 2016
6116 posts
4613 upvotes
Calgary/Vancouver
+1 for Subaru. Screw the HR-V, it's a sad excuse for an SUV. Better to go with a Civic hatchback or step up to a CR-V.
Newbie
Jun 26, 2019
10 posts
6 upvotes
Hey Folks,

Thank you all for your input. I decided to go with the HR-V because it was from a dealership and I'll have a bit of peace of mind in case something happens when I leave the lot. I also spoke with my coworker who owned a 2013 Subaru Crosstrek Sport and he told me that he had to replace his front Axle and rear wheel bearing at 80,000KM (when he talked to a few local mechanics, nobody could believe him but when he brought it to a Subaru dealership, they said it's a pretty common issue for those models), that repair set him back ~$800.

Using RFD logic, I decided to get the boring car and save $ in the future. Although the HRV is slow and a little funny looking there's really not much that could break as it's a FWD and a pretty old and tested engine + transmission, not to mention it's not designed by Jetco like Subaru.

Thanks again everyone!
Deal Fanatic
Apr 5, 2016
6116 posts
4613 upvotes
Calgary/Vancouver
I don't get that peace of mind thing with the dealer. The HR-V is out of warranty. If anything happens, the dealer is just going to say tough luck you're on the hook for any repairs unless you bought extended warranty.

2016 was the first model year of the HR-V and Is the most problematic year. The CVT is the biggest issue. There's a 7 page thread on the HRV forums about this and several people had to have their transmission replaced. Honda reliability aren't as good as they used to be. My own Honda Pilot have been in the shop few times already.
Deal Addict
Oct 21, 2006
1085 posts
900 upvotes
I myself would have gone with a Honda Civic if awd is not a requirement.
Member
Feb 2, 2018
414 posts
387 upvotes
Montreal
Tankman13 wrote: Using RFD logic, I decided to get the boring car and save $ in the future. Although the HRV is slow and a little funny looking there's really not much that could break as it's a FWD and a pretty old and tested engine + transmission, not to mention it's not designed by Jetco like Subaru.
Subaru transmission aren't made by Jatco. That's Nissan. Subaru CVTs are designed and made in-house.

Seriously, have you considered the hatchback versions of these vehicles? Some of these CUVs like the HRV and the CX-3 are barely taller than a Civic. The Crosstrek is literally an Impreza raised up with larger wheels. If your summer camping is accessible by a normal car, an Impreza will do the same job at a far better price. For skiing, Subaru sedans and hatchbacks are beasts in the snow -far better than even the AWD version of the HRV.

In any case, since you're only keep the car for ~2 years, nothing you choose will be the end of the world. 113K km for a Honda should be nothing. Push button start + keyless entry is also really really nice to have.
Temp. Banned
Jun 18, 2008
5095 posts
4664 upvotes
Montreal
Tankman13 wrote: Hey Folks,

Thank you all for your input. I decided to go with the HR-V because it was from a dealership and I'll have a bit of peace of mind in case something happens when I leave the lot. I also spoke with my coworker who owned a 2013 Subaru Crosstrek Sport and he told me that he had to replace his front Axle and rear wheel bearing at 80,000KM (when he talked to a few local mechanics, nobody could believe him but when he brought it to a Subaru dealership, they said it's a pretty common issue for those models), that repair set him back ~$800.

Using RFD logic, I decided to get the boring car and save $ in the future. Although the HRV is slow and a little funny looking there's really not much that could break as it's a FWD and a pretty old and tested engine + transmission, not to mention it's not designed by Jetco like Subaru.

Thanks again everyone!
Both of your choices are dogs, not wise decision to buy a vehicle that is essentially over 50% past it's useful live and has no warranty for $16k. If you had an additional $3-$4000 you could have got a brand new 2019 Trax with auto and AC, FWD with full warranty for 5 years and 2 years of free oil changes. There is a $5100 rebate ongoing. Not sure why you rushed into this.
Newbie
Jun 26, 2019
10 posts
6 upvotes
Thanks for the reply! Hmm, I never thought about getting an American car (perhaps because I hear that they're not as reliable, but I know that's not true now a days). However, since I'm only considering using this car for ~2.5 years, I'm not sure if buying brand new would have been a good choice due to the off-the-lot depreciation + it being a Chevy. I plan to drive ~15,000KM in these next two years so by that time the car should have ~130,000KM and be 7 years old which is a pretty standard mileage for that year, with that logic I hope the car wouldn't depreciate too much (and due to the fact that it's a Honda).

Ultimately, I was looking for a car that was a) reliable with low maintenance costs and b) I could use for ~2.5 years and lose as little money as possible due to depreciation.
Temp. Banned
Jun 18, 2008
5095 posts
4664 upvotes
Montreal
Tankman13 wrote: Thanks for the reply! Hmm, I never thought about getting an American car (perhaps because I hear that they're not as reliable, but I know that's not true now a days). However, since I'm only considering using this car for ~2.5 years, I'm not sure if buying brand new would have been a good choice due to the off-the-lot depreciation + it being a Chevy. I plan to drive ~15,000KM in these next two years so by that time the car should have ~130,000KM and be 7 years old which is a pretty standard mileage for that year, with that logic I hope the car wouldn't depreciate too much (and due to the fact that it's a Honda).

Ultimately, I was looking for a car that was a) reliable with low maintenance costs and b) I could use for ~2.5 years and lose as little money as possible due to depreciation.
Still would have gone for a used Trax, a 2016-2017 would have given you a powertrain warranty for your 2.5 years of use for well under $14k with lower mileage and loaded with AWD. These depreciate like a stone thanks to buyers like you who don't even consider them. Anyway too late now, enjoy your lifted Fit.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Sep 13, 2003
9923 posts
1665 upvotes
The Crosstrek is friggin terrible. Had one before, everytime you accelerate it literaly struggles. Such a whiny sounding car. Gas terrible. I upgraded to a WRX, and the WRX had better gas mileage!
One blind human - a tragedy
Ten blind humans - a disaster
One million blind humans - a statistic
Deal Expert
Jan 27, 2006
21844 posts
15620 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
aquariaguy wrote: The Crosstrek is friggin terrible. Had one before, everytime you accelerate it literaly struggles. Such a whiny sounding car. Gas terrible. I upgraded to a WRX, and the WRX had better gas mileage!
What did you expect from 148 HP? If you think 148 HP was underpowered (compared to a WRX none the less), the OP is comparing that to a 141 HP HR-V...
Deal Addict
Jan 21, 2011
1591 posts
960 upvotes
GTA
I would just lease or buy a Nissan kick if you don’t care about awd. $16000 for a used car when a brand new one will cost the same or close to it don’t really make sense to me. Lease a kick or check out what Mazda has close to your price point.

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)