The seatback can fold in a 60/40 fashion in order to free up more cargo space which was about what you’d expect for a hatchback vehicle without the more traditionally squared off shape of a wagon or actual CUV. Under the floor is the spare tire and while the space was functional it wasn’t huge.
It is though competitive with the smaller CUV competition in general (Toyota C-HR, Nissan Kicks, maybe Rogue Sport, and Honda HR-V). I seem to see a lot of Crosstreks with roofboxes attached to the standard roof rails.
The rear hatch uses an electronic button but is otherwise powered via the user, i.e. you lift it and you slam it shut. This works as well as it ever did, one less thing to break, and there is a molded-in handhold in the liftgate so no need to touch the metal when closing it.
Underhood is Subaru’s 2.5liter horizontally opposed 4-cylinder engine, in this case producing 182hp @ 5,800rpm and 176lb-ft of torque at 4,400 rpm. This is an increase of 30hp and 21lb-ft over the 2.0liter version of this engine and makes all the difference. Note the location of the oil filter at the front right of the engine bay, why can’t (won’t) others do similar? While more basic versions of the Crosstrek are available with a 6-speed manual transmission, moving up to the 2.5liter requires accepting the standard Lineartronic CVT.
Outfitted with eight simulated gears, this CVT does a good job of putting the power to the ground. When cold it tends to drone a little by seeming to leave the revs closer to the torque peak, likely to quickly get heat into the engine, but once warmed up it’s quite invisible in the background and you can mainly see the rpms moving about as with a conventional automatic transmission.
In other words, it doesn’t usually act in an unwelcome manner and to most users would seem as if there is nothing out of the ordinary (although it must be said this statement phrasing is getting old as CVT’s are very much becoming the ordinary these days). Moving the shifter into manual mode and using the paddle shifters doesn’t gain anything of note, the computer is well capable of making the decisions and while the engine is larger and more powerful, it’s not like this is an STi version. It is also capable of towing 1,500 pounds, not enough for a large trailer but enough for small home projects.
That said, driving the Crosstrek Sport is fun. It’s small enough to be nimble with good sightlines, and even with the raised suspension corners with aplomb, aided by the Active Torque Vectoring System that will brake an inside wheel to promote more accurate turn-in and higher limits. Acceleration is enough to not leave the normal user wishing for more. While I’m sure some power-crazed reviewers still want more power, the reality is that this engine is an excellent match to the car and just what the doctor ordered, Subaru offers several high performance models to satisfy those who want or need that.
Engine noise is surprisingly low, but on the highway there is more road and wind noise than ideal, voices must be raised a little to be understood at speeds over maybe 60mph. It isn’t the tires as it doesn’t really vary based on the surface being traversed, so a little more sound deadening would be welcome, although at this price level some trade-offs are to be expected and acceptable. Around town this is a complete non-issue.
The steering is light and precise although lacking in much feel. Due to the relatively light weight (3,265 pounds), it corners well and predictably without significant roll and grips well by apportioning engine power to the wheels as needed using Subaru’s Symmetrical AWD system. Never does a single axle feel like it’s being overpowered which is a relaxing way to drive and overall the car delivers a surefooted feel. The wheels 17″ alloys are finished in a gunmetal sort of color that integrate with the matching mirrors as well as the cladding and shod with Yokohama Geolandar G91 tires sized at 225/60-17. Brakes are four wheel discs and stop the vehicle in a confident manner time after time.
I drove this Subaru quite a few miles this week at various levels of speed and elevation. My trips included a roundtrip on fast highways to Laramie, Wyoming (145 miles), another to Denver via the freeway (150 miles) as well as a highway trip to the east (70 miles). Interspersed were the usual local trips for errands and such encompassing another 64 miles for a total of 429 miles.
My overall fuel economy averaged 30.2mpg which was quite refreshing and perfectly in line with the official ratings of 27city, 34highway, and 29combined. Regular gasoline is just fine. As an aside the base Crosstrek with manual transmission and the smaller engine only delivers 22city and 29highway ratings. All tanks measure 16.6 gallons.
The Subaru does have a stop/start system but it is of the newer variable type, so when coming to a stop it will not engage unless a certain amount of pressure is registered on the brake pedal. So if it’s not your thing, it does not need to engage, it doesn’t make you drive differently than necessary either way.
However, when it does engage, a small window pops up in the instrument panel display and shows the accumulated time that the engine was off when stopped as well as the amount of fuel saved by doing so. These values accumulate until manually reset, so could conceivably show a significant “lifetime” savings.
Above I teased the starting price of the Crosstrek lineup and the Sport is the third of four trim levels, so its price starts a bit higher, at $26,495. This includes everything mentioned (remember, AWD is standard, usually an option elsewhere if even available) with one exception. There is one option for $1,600 which takes care of supplying the Subaru Starlink 8″ Multimedia Plus System Blindspot Detection w/Rear Cross Traffic Alert and Lane Change Assist. Of course there’s also a mandatory Destination Charge of $1,050 (not bad considering these are built in and shipped from Japan) for a grand total of $29,145.
The Crosstrek Sport is a great update of the existing Crosstrek and has corrected the major deficiency of the line. Conveniently it has done so by still offering the smaller engine for those that didn’t see a need for a change, so now everyone should be happy.
What’s most refreshing is that the Crosstrek overall is a well thought out package that doesn’t try to be anything more than perfectly competent and undemanding to drive and live with in the manner of the best cars out there. Not everyone may need everything a Subaru offers, but few really need anything more than a Subaru offers either. If one of the multiple form factors on offer works, then it seems hard to go wrong with them.
Thank you to Subaru for lending us this 2021 Subaru Crosstrek Sport with a full tank of fuel!
Pages: 1 2
I’m really pleased Subaru is doing well in the States. Here in the UK, they really are a dying brand, especially since axeing the STI and WRX models. A shame as I’ve always appreciated them as being a bit of a left field choice.
I’ve often wondered myself why simply lifting-and-cladding a hatchback to enter the small-CUV segment hasn’t caught on with the auto industry. At worst, it’s a few extra marginal sales, at best a way to satisfy both a fast growing mainstream segment and what’s becoming a car-guy niche with one set of expensive body stampings.
Those wheels, and the whole car, would look 100% better if they were painted a lighter, brighter shade of silver. The sub-Sport trims have the outer rim polished which at least defines the wheel/tire boundary and gets rid of the issue on so many modern cars of everything but the main body color being black, in exchange for a somewhat cheesy fake-bead-lock effect.
Anyone planning to use one at the edge of its’ off-road performance would be wise to seek out a manual, CVTs tend to overheat at low-speed, low-ratio/high-strain off road situations. If you’re lucky the ECU will shut it down until the trans cools off, if not the CVT may simply de$$$troy itself, depending on the car.
My manual 2.5 turbo Forester was actually a bit tricky off-road. With tall (for an off-roader) gearing and limited ground clearance, low speed crawling meant lots of clutch slip. Not sure if an auto or CVT would be any less comfortable in that situation. After getting aftermarket skid plates I was more confident keeping speeds up. And of course the XV has higher ground clearance. A very appealing car – thanks again Jim for a good review!
My brother’s friend with a manual ’09 Forester has similar issues with lack of low gearing offroad, likewise I yanked a stick shift Crosstrek out of the sand at the Outer Banks in my old 4Runner, I smelled the clutch before I saw the car.
Hard to imagine why the 2.5 wasn’t available earlier, especially since the fuel economy is good.
Our 2000 Forester’s 2.5 was rated at 170hp, so not much of an increase in power. But it averaged 22mpg, which was a bit disappointing. 30 mpg is more like it.
Yes, these are very popular here too.
Not enough time to own all the cars and put lots of miles on each of them! Friend bought one of these several years ago. Sold it off to their grown offspring and bought another one. Saw it recently. Nice car! No trouble with the old Crosstrek they reported.
I guess everybody has different measurements and expectations when it comes to power. I’ve mentioned before that my mother and her husband traded an early WRX sedan for a then-new 2014 or ’15 Forester with the 2.5. They were seriously disappointed with the power after being accustomed to the turbo WRX. It was gone within 2 years in favor of a Tacoma. They felt like it had no guts in the higher altitudes (their 1/2 year place is in Dillon, CO, probably not too far from Jim Klein). I didn’t realize these CrossTreks didn’t have at least the 2.5 standard. Mom is now driving an Outback Onyx, which they find adequately powered.
My wife had both a 2000 Impreza Outback and a 2014 Crosstrek, both purchased new. The 2000 was a fantastic driving vehicle, the 2014, much less so. Hopefully the CVT has been improved on the current model.
Just a question of curiosity, Jim.
You say the Crosstrek “uses the same bodyshell as the Impreza hatchback”, but you keep using the phrase “lifted wagon”. So is it a hatchback or a wagon?
Where? How about copying the words you think you read?
I only see him using the word “hatchback” repeatedly in reference to the Crosstrek. And I only saw the word “lifted wagon” used once, specifically in reference to the outback, which is a different vehicle and very much a ‘lifted wagon”. Here’s the actual paragraph:
It’s no surprise that Subarus can be seen in settings far from the mall parking lot. The real surprise is that none of the competition with hatchbacks that have failed here over the last few years tried to jump into the segment, just like with the Outback being more than just a lifted wagon, clearly there is more to success here as well.
Why do you continue to waste my/our time with comments that reflect a lack of reading comprehension or other cognitive skills? I just wasted 10 minutes re-reading the article (not that it was really necessary, as I know that Jim knows the difference between a hatchback and lifted wagon) just to have to prove you wrong, once again. This happens almost daily.
I hate to belabor this point any further, but you’ve accused Jim Klein of using the wrong body style terminology to describe the Crosstrek in his review, and repeatedly, at that. That’s not a matter of opinion or subjectivity; it’s a question of hard facts. And calling out Jim for making a mistake on his hard facts without any basis and when it’s clearly not the case is not welcome here. In fact, it’s in violation of our commenting policy.
We’re not going to go down the “fake news” road at CC.
The Crosstrek and Impreza hatchback that it is based on are hatchbacks as I define them. I don’t call them wagons (and haven’t here as far as I can see). I did refer to the Outback being more than just a lifted wagon but that’s a different model related to the larger Legacy.
The Crosstrek is obviously a hatchback.
Subaru, along with Volkswagen, seem to be the only companies consistently paying attention to driver visibility. All models of both companies offer thin pillars and minimal window “frit” (the black painted border around the glass)
I remember when Subaru attempted to look like any other car and they nearly went out of business over it. Now, they have an eclectic look that seems to work.
And they had the ad campaign to go with it. It’s been a while since I’ve read Where the Suckers Moon.
The RHD Levorg would be nice to see stateside, but Subaru has to keep its lineup simple.
About that destination charge: I thought all current-generation Imprezas/Crosstreks for sale in North America were built in Indiana, and that only Foresters and BRZs now come from Japan. Or perhaps the 2.5-liter versions are imported, but not the 2.0-liter cars. Please clarify.
My understanding is that Crosstrek is built in Japan. The one I reviewed here certainly was. I’m not sure about the rest, there is a plant expansion apparently happening in Indiana so perhaps more production will be moved there or it may just be used to build more volume of the existing models.
Outbacks, Legacies, Ascents and Imprezas are all built in Indiana, and all other Subaru models are built in Japan.
There are a lot of appealing vehicles in this general size/price class, but the Subie and its pancake 4 offer something unique. Along with the standard AWD, on top of that.
We have gotten spoiled with cars that do not require a lot of effort to get in or out of, and something configured like this might get on the short list for something at the JPC house when the time comes.
I will be OK with a $1k destination charge if it comes from Japan, but not if it comes from the plant about 50 miles north of me. 🙂
I believe that’s one of the cheaper destination charges out there although I think the whole extra charge should go away as a separate item, it’s a cost of doing business like any other and as such should just be included in the base price of the car since it is not one that can ever be removed by the consumer, even for those cars where factory delivery is offered. Of course it’s this way so the base price of the vehicle can be advertised as lower than it would be otherwise, still an annoyance. Technically it’s not even the charge to deliver to the customer but to the dealer since that is the selling entity here in the US. (And yes, Tesla charges it as well, $1200 as I recall).
Thanks for a comprehensive, thoughtful and balanced report.
It’s good to know that they keep equipping some of their vehicles with manual transmissions. My 2007 Outback with 5 speed MT has over 300,000 miles on it, and I have had some moments of worry about being able to replace it with a reasonably new Subaru with an MT.
I have no particular beef with a modern CVT, as the one in my wife’s Honda seems quite good, and Subaru has been tweaking theirs for a few years now. The Honda has great pick-up in sport mode, and gets about 35 mpg overall. Because I tend to keep cars for a while, I have some concerns about the long-term durability of the metal drive belt and the potentially catastrophic consequences of its demise. Also, I have just always enjoyed the feel of an MT.
It’s good to know that the new ones get such good fuel economy. My Outback tends to average about 23, and it seems that modern vehicles should be better, even accounting for the unavoidable drag of the AWD system.
I see the author’s point about engine size, and Subaru making do with less. The 2.0 on my 1996 Outback did feel a little small. Though it suited the way I used the car most of the time, I sometimes felt that I was asking a lot of it. The 2.5 in my current vehicle is a nice improvement, but I could see a modern 2.0 doing the job, especially with a MT. It seems that they have done away with their 6 cylinder option, moving instead to a turbocharged 2.4 liter.
In the US, the 1996 Outback with manual transmission had a 2.2, not a 2.0. (Automatic Outbacks came with a 2.5.)
Oh, yes, that is correct. Thanks for the clarification. I parted with that car over 10 years ago and some of the details have faded into the mists of time.
We have an ’18 XT Limited driven mainly by my wife, which besides the engine upgrade on the highlighted 2021 model is very similar (platform, interior, etc.). She would never give this thing up..loves the raised suspension and handling capabilities. I have the ’19 Forester Sport (yes, we are dedicated Subie owners) which has the 2.5 engine, and it would be a welcome powerplant for the XT. The local dealer is asking her to trade up, since they see it for service and know the miles are much lower than normal for a 3-yr old car. However, I won’t say anything to give her any big ideas!
I am sure you will have a good experience with this fine vehicle.
“It is though competitive with the smaller CUV competition in general (Toyota C-HR, Nissan Kicks, maybe Rogue Sport, and Honda HR-V)”
Because I see so few of those and the Crosstrek slays them in sales in my region, I had forgotten the Crosstrek competes with them and have tended to judge it as a standalone vehicle. Compared to any of those, I’d be drawn to a 2.0 + 5spd or 2.5 +CVT Crosstrek, hands-down. The Crosstrek is marketed as a pack-a-bunch-of-stuff-anywhere vehicle, but two things work against it there: the poor approach angle (see Jeep Compass and Renegade Trailhawk for how to do this right) and the cargo area truncated by both length and sloping roofline.
I was more referring to those in terms of space utilitization, i.e. specifically the cargo area and interior space. Totally fine for 2, not bad for two kids, but the often seen roof box comes in handy for the trip to Grandmas. At this point in my own life it would act just fine as a second vehicle – everyone in the bigger one for the big trips, and this would be fine for me and one of the kids to go skiing or whatever else on a daily basis.
It’s certainly not a full-on off-road vehicle, beyond off-paved roads and some undemanding landscape. The ground clearance is good though for those heavy snow days as is the AWD, not even offered on two of those others in the segment. However it’s also more expensive, starting where the Kicks ends as one example. In the end it’s a bit nebulous as to where it really competes (or is intended to), I’m sure there are plenty who cross-shop it with the CRV, RAV4 et al as well, I know several who have gone back and forth between that grouping, and I’m sure others select it after looking at Outback and Forester as well, although those are distinct vehicles too in ostensibly different “segments”.
The crossover pie is sliced so thinly nowadays that I’m not quite sure what competes with what, either. It seems like an integral function in calculus would better describe the curve than trying to define the multiple price and size segments currently on offer.
Exactly. What baffles is that neither VW nor Ford actually tried to make a competitor, VW just did it sort of with the wagon version which barely added any ground clearance and was too small to compete with the Outback, but the regular Golf may have worked vs the Crosstrek and Ford kind of blew up the Focus’s rep before being able to bring the one they showed off to market. Hyundai could try it with their Elantra although they have what seems like a dozen CUV entries circling the segment and Toyota could try a CrossCorolla with their newish hatchback, but no, just let Subaru keep selling close to 150k in recent years in this market alone. Subaru IS the only one that bases it on a car that is already awd, all the time, so far less of a further investment I suppose.
The HR-V has to be one of the segment’s top sellers around here, ugly as it is with its’ un-Honda-like “hidden” rear door handles which makes me wish they’d gone for the WR-V (built for Brazil and India and using the Fit bodyshell) instead, along with the Jeep Renegade and Buick Encore (!) but the Crosstrek probably outsells them all.
This being Vermont, used Subarus hold their value too, to the point they sell a good many base-model Impreza hatchbacks since $18-20k worth of used Outback is so old and tired relative to anything else at that price point that originally cost what they did, that buying a brand-new base model makes sense. For that matter, the “screw-it” point may be as low as $15k since new-car interest rates tend to be a bit lower than used.
A blue light on the dash to signify that the engine is cold. How quaint. My father’s 1964 Impala had a green light on the dash for the same purpose. Real advancement by them folks in 47 years huh. Oh and a CD player…really?
I like CDs. They sound good and remind me of a time when I had to carefully consider what albums I spent my sparse dollars on. If they didn’t fail to provide a wanted feature in exchange for that CD slot, then you’re actually getting a free feature.
I used to scoff at the engine temp idiot light until I heard that a gauge doesn’t have to correlate well with actual engine temperature and may be giving the illusion of precision. True? Who knows, but it’s been 15 years since I’ve seen the needle venture *at all* above the perfect midpoint on any car I’ve owned. May as well be a binary light at that point.
Is it OK that they’re still using a lever to activate old-timey turn signals, or is that 47 years out of date as well? 🙂
What would you suggest be used to denote optimal engine temperature, then? Any gauge would be a dummy gauge too.
I’ve been thinking about one of these as a replacement for my Outback within the next couple of years. There are quite a few of them on the road around here (New England), so the market speaks well of their utility. Though I haven’t actually checked one out yet, I wonder about their cargo capacity. My car needs to be able to transport bicycles and skis, garbage/recycling and occasional building materials. I also like to drive on forest roads and through snow. The Outback does these things well, but I don’t need the length for much of my driving and would like better fuel economy.
Jim, these photos are amazing! Subaru should want to buy them from you.
A new, and maybe only exact competitor (clad and lifted hatch body) would be the Mazda CX-30. And just recently, THEY just upped the ante with a turbo version.
I like these Crosstreks very much, and it likely would have been a default purchase, but I ended up with a Golf Alltrack instead. Same concept, different interpretation. It’s actually much closer to the original Outback, which I far preferred to the current edition.
In comparison in terms of utility, I have only 7” ground clearance, and slightly less rear legroom, but being a true wagon, far more load volume and longer floor length.
Any remaining perceived deficit is entirely eradicated by pure driving pleasure.
Thanks for another comprehensive review.
The Crosstrek is quite popular in SoCal – with all age groups. With its compact dimensions and tight turning radius the Crosstrek meets major criteria for urban driving. Styling is subjective but I think the car looks great. Love the color on this one. I see that the Limited model has a rear armrest and cupholders. I wonder if it also has additional sound insulation. Now with adequate power and great economy the Crosstrek is a really nice option for the category.
These are all over Bend and usually identically decorated with PNW and brewery stickers and often “overlanders”. Subaru should offer an “Oregon” package with the stickers and roof tent preinstalled and throw in a free Patagonia or North Face jacket and a Hydro Flask. Instant camouflage for newly arrived Californians. Apart from the 2.5 head gasket issue I’ve never heard anything particularly bad about the Crosstrek but I’m glad I drive a Mazda to be a little bit different, while spending less money and having more fun driving.