Subaru just debuted an off-road version of the beloved Crosstrek — the little underpowered all-wheel drive wagon that folks who love the outdoors but don’t love high gas prices have been buying for years. It’s about damn time; here’s what we know.
The Subaru Crosstrek has been printing money for years now. Lots of people love the outdoors and want a vehicle that can get them there, but for the longest time, finding something with four-wheel drive has been either too expensive or too big of a compromise in terms of fuel economy (not everyone wants to deal with the Toyota 4Runner’s sub-20 MPG combined fuel economy). The Crosstrek has filled the “cheap AWD Japanese car” niche beautifully, especially since the Suzuki SX4 left the U.S. market about a decade ago.
A few years ago, Subaru announced its “Wilderness” line — essentially just their standard models, except raised a bit to improve ground clearance, styled with fun yellow accents (which highlight the recovery points) and tough-looking body cladding, and outfitted with all-terrain tires. The Outback Wilderness and Forester Wilderness have been rather popular, so it only makes sense to Wilderness-ify the brand’s best-selling model — the baby in the lineup — the Crosstrek.
.
The Wilderness version of the Subaru Crosstrek adds half an inch of ground clearance to the standard model for a total of 9.3 inches thanks to longer springs. It’s not a huge change, so it’s not surprising that the approach, breakover, and departure angles aren’t that different:
The approach angle is increased from 18.0 degrees in other Crosstrek models to 20.0 degrees on the Wilderness; the angle of departure increases from 30.1 to 33.0 degrees, and ramp breakover angle moves up from 19.7 to 21.1 degrees.
The Crosstrek Wilderness comes equipped with Yokohama GEOLANDAR® all-terrain tires for optimal performance in mud, gravel or snow. Mounted on exclusive 17-inch alloy wheels in matte-black finish, the tires are embossed with raised white letters.
A couple of degrees does help, though. And so will those all-terrain tires. Towing capacity is up from 1,500 pounds to 3,500 pounds. That’s a huge leap. And the starting price is a reasonable $31,995.
Here are some more pictures of the new Subaru Crosstrek Wilderness in all of its tough, cladded-up glory, which — let’s be honest — will be half the reason most folks buy it:
[Editor’s Note: I would just like to take a moment here to re-iterate that this is indeed a wagon. This isn’t an opinion, or some fuzzy feeling, it’s motherflapping math and science.
Remember, there are rules for this! I’m not pulling this ex recto, the Crosstrek meets all three wagon rules: a two-box design, window for the rear cargo area, and a roofline that covers 50% or more of the cargo area floor.
It likely also meets Crossover Clause A and Crossover Clause B which makes it possible to be classed into crossover or SUV categories, but the body design is still clearly within wagon parameters. – JT]
This story is breaking news and being updated.
It’s insulting to wagons to call this a wagon; it’s also insulting to people with eyes.
Glad they are making the version they should have from the beginning, and they really should retire the 2.0L for the NA market for all of their vehicles. Subaru went through the exact same dilimea back in the late 1990s where they had a smaller displacment EJ available for Imprezas… then they went 2.5L EJ across the board…. I see the same thing happening for non-turbo models in the U.S. How could it cost them more? Frankly there is probably a lot of cost savings to have the same 2.5L replacment blocks being sent to dealers when they all need to be replaced anyway… because Subaru durability/longevity without major reparis is very over-hyped.
Still like them as a brand, had one and did need to replace the 2.0L motor for oil consumption out of warranty (somehow got Sub to pay that one!).
In my driveway are a 2019 Crosstrek & a MK7 TDI Sportwagen. One wagon, and one butch hatchback. I just can’t see the Xtrek as a wagon beside that lovely blue longroof.
Both manual btw.
After measuring the cargo floor difference between the two, the GSW has nine inches more cargo floor than the Xtrek with seats up. To me that really puts paid to the Subaru’s wagon aspirations.
I agree with others in thinking JT’s wagon-proving diagram are being a bit “generous” with some of their measurements, but I think that’s beside the point.
The bigger issue is that if current rules for wagon classification can be gamed such that the above vehicle technically meets the criteria, then updated criteria are needed because we’re getting false positives.
It may well be a fine automobile, but it does not look, walk, or quack like a wagon.
David can call this a wagon all he wants, but he will still be tying himself to the mast of Wrong as he sails past the Sirens of Hatchback. Subaru makes an *actual* wagon of this body, and it’s the Levorg. This is not it.
I am generally in the camp of safari all the things, but none of Subaru’s Wilderness edition cars look good. I love me some plastic cladding (grew up riding around in a 94 GC Laredo) but its too busy. It’s like they got some Silverado designers who had been laid off. Also, the proportions seem wrong and with the lift they all look like a kid who has had a growth spurt and their pants and shirts are just too short. While 3,500 lbs seems terrifying imagine what the real-world number is when you calculate passengers and any gear. Bring 4 friends and a cooler and now your available capacity is 2,500 at most, so that covers a pair of Sea-Doos on a trailer. In that respect, I think Subaru got it right.
I’ve owned a hatchback (’92 Ford Probe), and what I consider to be a wagon (’23 Crosstrek). I am firmly in the Crosstrek = wagon camp, and don’t know why it’s even up for debate. It has a vertical liftgate for pete’s sake… That’s wagon territory.
As for the ’24 Crosstrek Wilderness, I’m glad it exists, and it represents a sense of humor that Subaru used to have 30+ years ago which is good. That said, it’s a little too outlandish for my taste.
I love my ’23 Crosstrek Limited, and ran out and bought it as soon as I saw photos of the redesigned ’24+ models, with their less attractive exterior and absence of buttons and knobs in the interior.
3500 lb tow rating? Hah! Trying to tow a camper larger than a small popup will have that tail wagging this dog. And it’s slow already with the 150 hp 2.0. The 182 hp 2.5 could actually pull 2000 lbs reasonably well. If the CVT is kept cool. Whatever cooler they put on, rip off the bumper to add a larger one.
The ’24 Crosstrek Wilderness uses the 182hp 2.5L engine, not the 2.0L. Adding a trans cooler and 4.11 final drive will not make the CT Wilderness a suitable vehicle for towing 3500lbs, though. I own a ’23 CT Limited with the same engine and I can’t imagine towing another Crosstrek behind my Crosstrek. Yowza.
We bought a Subaru Crosstrek sport a year ago. It is what it is. Sort of a no-bullshit, get it done type of vehicle. My wife does a lot of back country hiking and some of the roads leading to the trail heads are barely passable. For not being a Jeep it sure does a good job.
I think I’ll be checking out of the Subaru family when I’m done with my current ones. They were purchased specifically for the third pedal on an AWD vehicle.
If I have to get an automatic, I may as well get one with a less silly engine design. Also, the infotainment screen is integrated with all the elegance of a shadetree stereo install from the mid-90’s.
Subaru Aztec
We have a regular Crosstrek, feels like a small wagon to me, hatchback I think of a more sloped back and generally two doors. That is why we liked it. We drove the tall boxy CUVs, then the Crosstrek. It felt like a wagon lifted up off the ground a bit. We both liked the driving experience compared to similar class cars we drove.
They managed to make the crosstrek uglier.
Sorry, not a wagon, it’s an compact (was) hatchback. Stop diluting wagons
That cutout in the cladding for the fuel filler hole is just unforgivably hideous. Yeah, it’ll sell, but the more unfortunate thing is that I’ll never be able to unsee that frickin’ fuel filler hole. It’s just egregious. I don’t mind cladding as much as the next person, but like, figure out how to do it in a way that accentuates the features of the car. That fuel-hole makes it look like a half-baked afterthought.
Hey why aren’t you writing in this joint yet?
I don’t think it bothers me, in the grand scheme. It’s one of the smaller sins of just gluing a buttload of plastic to the doors and fenders to make it look “rugged”.
But i will say that i love fuel-hole. Not everybody eats pie, so i think “Shut yer fuel-hole” should really catch on.
Oh gosh, if I overuse any word at all, it’s “hole.” Garages are holes. Trunks are holes. Is it an opening for things to go into? Huh huh huh huh, hole.
Man subaru pulled the same rabbit out of the same hat with these wilderness edition cars. I see them EVERYWHERE in the Pacific Northwest. Reminds me of when they did the same thing with the outback version of the legacy. They were also absolutely (and still are) everywhere in Washington.
Subaru could do worse than to add the crosstrek goodies to the levorg/wrx impreza wagon as I don’t consider the current crosstrek a real wagon even if technically it fits the parameters.
It would be nice if they could resurrect the dual range transfer case, that was common in early JDM/EU spec Foresters, Legacys, even Imprezas.
Because it has decent ground clearance, decent traction control system, the only thing that’s missing to be a true off-roader is the low range.
Didn’t those have a 1.2:1 ratio?
Why does it look like a pile of broken plastic container bits?
Jason, I understand that it follows the rules, but my litmus test is if I knock out my dog while closing the hatch. She’s a large breed dog, and would have no headroom in that “wagon”. I have owned 9 subaru wagons back when they were small and quirky as a company. They had manual transmissions and you could easily fit a big dog, bike or whatever you needed in the back. Now it’s a puffed up crossover. No thanks.
I would never buy those dealer decals that say My _th Subaru though. Those are tacky.
those are free.
Those badges with all the activity symbols are so cringe. As a Crosstrek owner, I’m in the Crosstrek groups on Facebook and Reddit and people are often showing theirs.
In a perfect world, the utility found in Wilderness, Trailsport and Woodland trims would be standard across the board. Why are sport and utility extra charge on SUVs?
I know many people will pay an extra 5k to appear rugged in the mall parking lot, but I can’t justify it (despite how much I want it).
Unlike the WRX, Subaru at least leaves the option to buy the non-cladded model: The Impreza 2.5RS. I’m sure all the little bits such as the skid plate, new oil cooler and shorter final drive can be fitted just fine. Just add a lift and some all terrains and boom: Homebrew Wilderness.
Now if I could just figure out how to swap a manual into one…
I’ve always thought of my ‘18 manual Crosstrek as a hatchback rather than a wagon (maybe because I had an XC70?) but Subaru actually goes out of their way to call it an SUV in their literature.
Also “people who need outdoor access and decent mpg’s is me to a T. As a climbing and paddling guide who’s lived and worked all over the country a Crosstrek will get you pretty much anywhere you need to go outside of a few rocky places in the southwest. Decent ground clearance, decent angles, good tires and careful driving will get you there.
Bummer about the lack of a stick since it really makes the low power easier to get along with. Though the manual in mine is garbage and Subaru CVT’s are pretty good I’d still choose a manual if it were an option.
JT’s passion for wagon rules rivals that of DT’s passion for less vs. fewer! I guess everybody has their kink!
Where the lines are drawn for the wagon determination is questionable. Looking at interior photos of the back seat and cargo area of the Crosstrek online, I think the forward end of your cargo line is actually closer to where a rear-seat passenger’s butt would be. The interior roofline in the cargo area is maybe shorter than drawn. In close calls like this, a wagon determination really needs interior cargo floor and roof measurements. I request a recount! Or maybe someone here with an Crosstrek (or Impreza… same body) can measure their car.
By the way, you let Thomas call the 2024 Impreza a hatchback in two articles ;).
HEY NO SNITCHING
Thomas is right though.
He is, IMHO. “Hatchback” vs. “wagon” is a whole vibe. It’s like that obsolete defintion for porn: you know it when you see it.
Torch is close. Front of seat back is basically flush with the front of the wheel well. Back of the backseat is about 5 inches aft of that. Best I can tell, his demarcation of cargo area splits the difference. Granted, this is on a previous gen Crosstrek, which actually moved the seat back about 1.5″ from previous gen to provide a bit more legroom. Not sure if they’ve made any further changes with this gen.
2 cents: I consider mine a wagon.