Subaru Forester SJ vs Honda CR-V: specs side by side
Quick comparison from catalog data - no editorial review of this pair yet.

Subaru · 2012–2018
Forester SJ
- Power
- 110 kW150 PS
- Kerb mass
- -
Photo: Vauxford / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0

Honda · 2016–2022
CR-V
- Power
- 110 kW150 PS
- Kerb mass
- 1,685 kg
Photo: EurovisionNim / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0
At a glance
Who suits what, worked out from the catalog figures of the versions above.
- City Forester SJ Width: 1,780 mm vs 1,820 mm
In plain words
Subaru Forester SJ is 25 mm longer than Honda CR-V (4,595 mm vs 4,570 mm). Subaru Forester SJ is the older design (from 2012); Honda CR-V arrived in 2016. On the catalog figures, the Subaru Forester SJ is the pick for city. Our catalog has no kerb mass for the Subaru Forester SJ yet, so some checks above leave it out.
Size and weight
Side view to scale, all cars from the front bumper.
| Forester SJ | CR-V | |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 4,595 mm180.9 in † | 4,570 mm179.9 in −25 mm −1.0 in −0.5% |
| Width | 1,780 mm70.1 in | 1,820 mm71.7 in +40 mm +1.6 in +2.2% |
| Height | 1,700 mm66.9 in | 1,657 mm65.2 in † −43 mm −1.7 in −2.5% |
| Wheelbase | 2,615 mm103.0 in | 2,620 mm103.1 in +5 mm +0.2 in +0.2% |
| Fits a standard garage? | Yes | Yes |
Difference vs Forester SJ (±). Garage check: a standard single garage takes a car up to about 5.0 m (16 ft 5 in) long and 1.9 m (6 ft 3 in) wide (width as listed in the catalog; some makers include the mirrors). Leave about 0.6 m (2 ft) to open the doors. † from another version of this generation.
Full specifications
| Subaru Forester SJ | Honda CR-V | |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Version | 2.0 · 110 kW (150 PS) | 2.0 · petrol · 110 kW (150 PS) |
| Production years | 2012–2018 | 2016–2022 |
| Body | SUV | SUV |
| Class | SUV / crossover | SUV / crossover |
| Country | Japan | Japan |
| Performance | ||
| Power Why it matters: More power means stronger acceleration and easier overtaking, especially with a full load. | 110 kW (150 PS) 148 hp | 110 kW (150 PS) 148 hp |
| Power, all versions | 108–206 kW (147–280 PS) 145–276 hp | 88–142 kW (120–193 PS) 118–190 hp |
| Power per tonne | No data | 65 kW/t 79 hp/ton calculated |
| Engine and transmission | ||
| Fuel | No data | Petrol |
| Engine | 2,000 cc 2.0 l | 2,000 cc · 4 cyl 2.0 l |
| Drive | All-wheel drive | No data |
| Dimensions and weight | ||
| Length | 4,595 mm 180.9 in † | 4,570 mm 179.9 in |
| Width | 1,780 mm 70.1 in | 1,820 mm 71.7 in |
| Height | 1,700 mm 66.9 in | 1,657 mm 65.2 in † |
| Wheelbase | 2,615 mm 103.0 in | 2,620 mm 103.1 in |
| Kerb weight Why it matters: A lighter car is usually more agile and uses less energy. | No data | 1,685 kg 3,715 lb |
| Boot Why it matters: A bigger boot fits more luggage, shopping or a pram. | 500 l 17.7 cu ft | No data |
| Economy and running costs | ||
| Fuel consumption Why it matters: Lower consumption cuts running costs and CO₂ emissions on every trip. | No data | 7.9 l/100 km 29.8 mpg US |
| CO₂ | No data | 156 g/km |
| Fuel cost per year | No data | €2,070/year estimated |
| Safety | ||
| Euro NCAP | ★★★★★ (2012) | ★★★★★ (2019) |
These cars do not differ in the data we have.
Equal rows hidden (4): Body, Class, Country, Power.
Estimated at 15,000 km a year with fuel at €1.75/l petrol. † from another version of this generation.