Suzuki Vitara vs Subaru Crosstrek

What's the difference?

In car years, 11 is ancient.

Back when it was first released, this-generation Vitara’s competitive pricing, progressive yet pretty design, pleasant interior packaging, sporty dynamics and general driving ease helped establish the emerging small SUV segment into the powerhouse it is today.

In some ways, today’s Turbo Hybrid still impresses, especially with its punchy performance, promising economy and no-nonsense packaging. Objectively, it is still a decent proposition, with few actual vices.

But the 2026 Vitara’s high pricing, embarrassingly outdated interior, underwhelming specification and noisy ride leave it feeling too expensive, too old and too exposed against newer and more-sophisticated rivals.

Even the brightest stars eventually need to retire.

Note: CarsGuide attended this event as a guest of the manufacturer, with travel and meals provided.

The Crosstrek is good to drive with great ground clearance and an excellent all-wheel drive system for light off-road adventures. I’m also a fan of the styling and features for the money. But The letdowns comes in the form of limited boot space and cabin storage, a short warranty and pricey servicing. Still, it’s great to see Subaru has updated the car's safety systems, the most important part of any car.

While the albeit-cheeky Mazda CX-3 clearly looks like a product of last decade, the Vitara’s boxy, broad-stance proportions were prescient, pointing to the upright shapes that prevail today. In other words, the good-looking design has aged remarkably well.

Changes to the headlights, a reshaped bumper, a revised grille, restyled wheels and paint colours are the only ways you can differentiate new from old, ignoring the Hybrid badge out back.

We wonder whether Suzuki should have tried harder visually updating the Vitara?

Measuring in at nearly 4.2 metres long, 1.8m wide and 1.6m high, the square-rigged styling hides the smallness of the Vitara, yet also seems to liberate more space inside than you might expect, aided by deep side windows.

Conversely, Suzuki’s decision to retain the old Vitara dashboard – including much of the same instrumentation – roots it into the middle of last decade. This is very disappointing.

While SUVs tend to come in either a tall and boxy or coupe-like shape, the Crosstrek has a uniquely sleek and sporty wagon look that has stayed much the same over three generations.

Also while the Crosstrek competes with the Honda HR-V, Hyundai Kona, Mazda CX-30 and Toyota Corolla Cross the Subaru is the most off-road suitable thanks in part to its high 220mm ground clearance

As if to signal those adventurous aspirations the Crosstrek has a more rugged appearance with robust-looking plastic guards and chunky roof rails.

Inside the Crosstrek looks so much the same as most other new Subarus it's hard to work out which one you’re in. The materials are dark and soft, there is not much in the way of glitzy trimmings but there’s a high quality feeling throughout. 

The practical shape, ease of access and spacious, airy cabin were reasons to buy the Vitara way back when, and remain relevant today.

But, stepping inside and taking a look around transports you to another time, like hearing Let it Happen by Tame Impala.

In the press release, Suzuki states: “Physical control switches remain a key focus, ensuring ease of use while driving, a touchpoint of Suzuki’s practical design philosophy.” Changing nothing in nearly a dozen years in production to save money seems more like the company’s key focus here. Even the steering wheel is precisely the same.

As we said earlier, nothing changed inside other than some minor trim, save for the new multimedia system that looks cheap and aftermarket compared to Suzuki’s earlier, distinctive and colourful quadrant layout. We welcome the inclusion of a digital speedometer, however.

Broad if flat front seats do the job, ahead of a workable driving position that helps provide good all-round vision as well as an easy reach to the multitude of buttons and switches placed around. The plastics have already proven to be long-lasting, while there is sufficient storage to be found. The climate control is effective, too.

The rear seat environment is spacious and pleasant enough, but lacks amenities like USB-C ports, cupholders and central air vents.

Further back, the load area is relatively large and simple to use. Cargo capacity varies from an unremarkable 362 litres to 642L (VDA – to the window height) or 1119L (to the ceiling), with the 60/40 rear backrests dropped providing extra versatility.

Thankfully, a space-saver spare wheel is included.

Overall, then, the Vitara’s cabin is roomy and user-friendly for a small SUV, but it also appears hopelessly out of date. That Suzuki also had the unrelated e-Vitara electric vehicle at the launch event just served to underline that fact.

The Crosstrek is a small SUV but its low and sleek shape doesn’t do it any practicality favours in terms of exiting and entering or storage in the boot.

Boot capacity is 291 litres which is very small compared to its rivals which have capacities closer to 350 or 400 litres.

People space inside, however, is good, and even for a tall (189cm) person like me there’s plenty of space up front and behind my driving position.

Storage space is passable with three cupholders and thin door pockets and a decent-size console bin.

Given the Crosstrek’s adventurous intent, the cabin should be more reflective of that rugged aspiration.

The Crosstrek range is divided into three petrol variants and two hybrids. With a list price of $43,990, our test Crosstrek 2.0S sits at the top of the petrols and second from the top of the line-up under the Crosstrek AWD Hybrid S flagship.

Standard features on our 2.0S include 18-in alloy wheels, roof rails, LED headlights and tail-lights, dual-zone climate control, push-button start, proximity unlocking , 10-speaker audio, wireless phone charging, Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, an 11.6-inch media touchscreen and leather-trimmed seats.

If you’re looking to save a few thousand dollars the 2.0R is almost as well equipped. 

Is it worth stepping up to the hybrid? Not in my opinion. The hybrid is the 'mild' kind and doesn't offer a great deal in terms of real-world fuel savings. You can read more on fuel efficiency below.

If you’re expecting a Toyota-style series-parallel hybrid system here, forget it.

Instead, Suzuki offers a far-simpler, lighter and cheaper alternative that, by and large, does reduce fuel consumption. In other words, this is a mild-hybrid electric vehicle (MHEV) that, unlike others like Mazda’s, you can feel working away.

On paper, things look a bit shaky, since power drops noticeably compared to the previous 1.4-litre, four-cylinder, turbo-petrol BoosterJet engine this unit is based on.

This version makes just under 81kW of power at 4500rpm, instead of 103kW at 5500rpm, in the interests of economy. Torque jumps though, from 220Nm to 235Nm, between a low 2000rpm to 2500rpm.

More importantly, it is coupled to a 48-volt integrated starter motor generator acting as an electric motor, and 48V 8Ah lithium-ion battery, adding an additional 12kW/50Nm to simultaneously boost acceleration and reduce consumption and emissions.

Power is sent to the front wheels via a six-speed torque-converter automatic transmission, while the AWD version also sends drive to the rear axle when slippage is detected.

The whole MHEV system adds just 15kg, and is nestled between the MacPherson strut front axle and torsion beam rear end, for even weight distribution.

The Crosstrek 2.0S uses a 2.0-litre, four-cylinder, horizontally-opposed 'boxer' petrol engine which makes 115kW and 196Nm. A continuously variable transmission (CVT) with eight 'speeds’ isn’t the most exhilarating automatic but all Subaru now use CVTs.

The boxer engine has advantageous in terms of a lower centre of mass and helps deliver better driving feel thanks to more adept handling. Boxer engines also sound better to my ears with their throaty burble.

The Vitara Turbo Hybrid 2WD returns a combined average 5.8 litres per 100km, while the AWD version is rated at 5.9L/100km. This translates to between 130 grams and 139g/km of carbon-dioxide emissions, respectively.

The previous 1.4-litre turbo equivalents were 5.9L and 6.2L/100km, so that mild-hybrid tech seems to make some difference. Our box-fresh test car’s trip computer driving around Sydney’s outer suburbs displayed 6.2L/100km.

Filling the 47L fuel tank with the required 95 RON premium-unleaded petrol, expect to average around 810km of range.

The Crosstrek 2.0S's combined cycle (urban/extra-urban) fuel consumption is 7.2L/100km which aligns closely with our real-world test average of 8.7L/100km returned over mainly urban and city driving. That’s not bad, but given the price of fuel as well as the availability of EVs and excellent hybrids from other brands the Crosstrek is seriously behind the times.

Yes, yes, there is a hybrid Crosstrek, but it’s a mild-hybrid and the electric motor doesn't drive the wheels and doesn’t save much fuel. The hybrid Crosstrek has a claimed combined cycle consumption figure of 6.5L/100km, so there’s not much difference between the efficiency of the two. When you consider the price premium you need to pay it’s not worth stepping up into the hybrid.

Suzuki allowed only a frustratingly limited amount of time for us to drive the Vitara Turbo Hybrid 2WD, over some outer-suburban Sydney back roads, in convoy with a lead car and in heavy traffic, so first impressions are limited.

But, unsurprisingly, it’s all very familiar, after years of testing earlier iterations.

Essentially, acceleration now feels leisurely in 'Eco' and 'Auto' when previously the 1.4L BoosterJet always felt punchy, but it becomes much stronger in 'Sport', suggesting the MHEV’s economy focus is the priority. The latter mode makes the Vitara feel lively and moves things along fairly quickly, but leaving it in Sport mode would defeat the purpose of trying to save fuel.

Meanwhile, the Vitara’s chassis calibration remains on the sporty side, with keen steering response and a decent level of handling agility there for the taking. And even the ride comfort wasn’t too bad, considering that too little suspension travel and too much road noise betray the age of this vehicle’s platform – though that may have also had something to do with us driving this back-to-back with the smoother e-Vitara EV.

Finally, the ADAS tech didn’t seem to interfere at all, though a longer drive may reveal otherwise.

The Vitara still drives okay, then, but its refinement and noise suppression may be issues for some people used to newer SUVs. The bigger problem for us is just how old the driving experience feels sitting inside such a dated cabin. Stale sums it up.

We also had a brief stint around a moderately-demanding off-road 4WD course to test the Turbo Hybrid AWD’s AllGrip set-up. The limited off-road aids – 4WD Lock, hill-descent control, a paltry 175mm ground clearance – helped see it navigate several carefully-chosen sections fairly confidently, but we can’t imagine this being the deal maker or breaker.

Overall, based on our brief time with it, the Vitara Turbo Hybrid remains an easy, competent and even enjoyable small SUV from behind the wheel, but one that feels dated in too many areas, especially at its asking price.

I’ve never met a new Subaru that wasn’t good to drive, apart from that time a friend sent me his 30-year old Brumby minus brakes. But even that was fun, until it was time to stop… Anyway, in my view the Crosstrek is better than its rivals in multiple areas except one, which I’ll get to in a moment.

The Crosstrek 2.0S is comfortable to sit in and its ride and handling balance is exceptional for a vehicle in this class. Honestly, the ride quality, body control and steering outshines the HR-V, Kona, CX-30 and Corolla Cross in my view.

A big call out has to go to the Crosstrek's all-wheel drive system, which is exceptional. I have tested this vehicle in some pretty adventurous settings and the kind of terrain it can devour would frighten its rivals.  

But the one area that lets the experience down is the CVT auto. I feel this way about this type of transmission in any car and I’m not alone. CVTs provide smooth acceleration and deceleration but if you’re hoping for an engaging, sporty experience you’ll be left wanting.

That said, my wife also drove the car and thought it was perfect for city traffic. And I agree, it’s just on the motorway where you might notice the lack of oomph when overtaking.

Visibility is good and you sit quite high for a little SUV. That small size makes it easy to park and manage in the city’s tighter spaces.

Part of the reason we're testing the Crosstrek is because it was updated with more safety tech and equipment towards the end of last year. This safety boost means the Crosstrek continues to boast a maximum five-star ANCAP rating.

The big change was to the 'Eyesight' sensor system with better traffic sign recognition and enhanced AEB systems. An emergency vehicle stop system has also been added to bring the car to a halt if the driver becomes unresponsive.

The rest of the Crosstrek’s features carry over including AEB, lane-keeping assistance, front and rear cross-traffic alert (with braking) and blind-spot warning.

For child seats there are two ISOFIX points and three top tether anchor mounts across the second row.

There is a spare where but it's a temporary type which will get you to a repair place.  

Suzuki offers an industry-average five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty, along with five years of roadside assistance if the vehicle is serviced at an authorised dealer.

Service intervals are every 12 months or 10,000km, while the basic capped-price servicing costs are $329, $429, $339, $539 and $349 annually for the first five years or 100,000km, respectively. That's an average of $397.

At the time of publishing Suzuki listed 90 dealers throughout Australia.

Subaru’s five year united kilometre warranty is becoming less appealing as other brands offer seven or even 10 years of coverage. 

Servicing is recommended every 12 months/15,000km and a capped schedule is pricey relative to its competitors at more than $2400 over five years or about $400 on average per service.

The brand is represented by a long-established and stable network of close to 130 dealers covering metro, rural and regional locations across every state and territory.