Toyota RAV4 Woodland vs. Subaru Forester Wilderness vs. Honda CR-V Trailsport: Which Is Best Off-Road?

• Off-road versions of regular ol' crossovers are all the rage.
• We take three from Honda, Toyota and Subaru to see which is best at its niche job. 
• Each has its own set of pros and cons. Read on or watch below to find out what those are.

3rd place: Honda CR-V TrailSport 

• Pros: Honda's on-road goodness is still here; fuel economy doesn't suffer in TrailSport form
• Cons: Tech is extremely basic; TrailSport feels like an afterthought; twitchy off-road

What do you get for the extra money? The short answer is: not much. That's because all Honda did was add different wheels and some all-terrain tires. The tires don't add any extra ground clearance, there's no change to the front bumpers for better approach or departure angles, and there's no change to the driveline, no new drive modes, and no full-size spare. 

There's no overselling it: These are changes you can make to any CR-V and see similar (or even larger) improvements. There were changes to the way the all-wheel-drive system and the stability control manage traction in slippery situations, but those updates were made to the entire CR-V lineup for 2026, not just the TrailSport. 

As a result, the CR-V ends up being the least impressive of the three here. It needs the most management (and a bootful of throttle) to get up the relatively shallow hill climb we set up. Because the throttle feels a lot like an on/off switch, it's hard to modulate and deliver the right amount of power when you need it. It also doesn't offer a 360-degree camera (or a front-facing one), so you can't rely on any tech to see what's around you or beside you. 

Over a more washboard-type surface, the Honda again loses out. The tires don't dig into the soft surface as much as you'd like, and the result is a floaty sensation at speeds that aren't particularly high. Most off-roaders (and indeed the other two here) feel much more concretely tied to the road surface at 25 to 30 mph, but the Honda's stiff ride and lack of traction leave you with a little too much doubt over just how much grip you have. 

The Honda's on-road benefits are still here (namely the composure and responsiveness), as are its huge cargo hold, great visibility, and the nicest buttons, knobs, and switches of this group. But when it comes time to take it off the beaten path, the Honda just doesn't do enough. Not to mention its 1,000-pound max tow rating is by far the lowest here. 

2nd place: Toyota RAV4 Woodland

• Pros: More comprehensive off-road makeover; tech is the most helpful here; more confident than the Honda
• Cons: Climate controls in the screen; ride is too firm for off-roading; interior isn't very nice

Toyota has deployed yet another sub-brand with the RAV4 Woodland. It's not the first example of Toyota's more "light-duty" off-road brand hitting the mainstream while TRD gets repositioned for a more hardcore audience. Yes, there was a Sienna Woodland before — and the previous RAV4 also had a Woodland variant, but that was mostly just an appearance package. The RAV4 Woodland effectively replaces the old RAV4 TRD, but Toyota has done more here than it did with the TRD variant of its best-seller (or the Woodlands that have come before).

A new look thanks to different front and rear bumpers slightly boosts the Woodland's approach and departure angles, and there's a cutout in the rear bumper for a tow hitch to make better use of its 3,500-pound tow rating. You also get the largest tires of the bunch, which offer better puncture protection off-road and have the side effect of giving you more ground clearance than the standard RAV4. 

But the Woodland's trump card over the other two is its camera array. The litany of exterior cameras gives you dedicated views of what's just in front of you, what's immediately to your left and right, and where your front wheels are pointing. 

All those off-road extras add up to a better performance than the Honda's. It made it up our small hill climb with less fuss and less wheelspin, and on the way down, the dedicated camera button made it easy to track what was ahead of and beside the car so we didn't cause any undue damage to the front bumper or the paint. 

On the soft stuff, the Toyota was more composed too. It felt like the chunkier tires dug into the surface better, and the Woodland was able to generate more grip. That said, the ride was just as firm as in the Toyota, and high-frequency bumps led to a jarring amount of bobbling around in the driver's seat. The last knock was the climate controls — because Toyota has put the vast majority of them in the screen, trying to adjust the fan speed or direction while you're getting jiggled around all over the place is a no-go.  

1st place: Subaru Forester Wilderness

• Pros: Sure-footed off-road; full-sized spare is a great addition; easiest to put your faith in 
• Cons: Average fuel economy; bad tech implementation

The Subaru might have felt like the default pick of the bunch, and guess what, that held true after two days of testing. The Forester's transformation to the Wilderness model is the most substantive of the three. A taller spring and damper combo gives it 9.3 inches of ground clearance (the best here), and new front and rear bumpers give great approach and departure angles (again, the best here). 

It's also tied with the Toyota for the best towing at 3,500 pounds, it offers at least one on-demand camera view (the front), and its tires, while not the biggest, are the most off-road-ready. But it doesn't stop there. Subaru added a transmission oil cooler to help the continuously variable automatic transmission (CVT) cope with stressful hill ascents and included a shorter final drive ratio — two changes seemingly deemed too major for the others. It's also the only car here with a full-size spare, and the importance of that can't be understated when you're off-road. 

The result was perhaps a predictable one. The Subaru made light work of the two tasks we set it. On its way up the hill, I was so confident I only really needed to use one hand, while on the way back down, the brakes were modulated so well that I didn't even feel the need to use X-Mode (which works in a hill descent feature). Over the sandy washboard road, the Subaru was the most compliant, maintained the best contact with the trail, and its tires dug in the best, giving the most traction by far. 

The cons? There aren't many. Fuel economy is subpar, and worse than the standard Forester's due to that shorter final drive (just 26 mpg combined compared to the Honda's 35 mpg and the Toyota's 39 mpg combined). Its interior touchscreen is the worst here, too, with poor resolution from the camera that's easily washed out in direct sunlight. It also only offers one camera view, and most of its climate controls are also relegated to the screen. 

But after a day in the dirt, the Subaru is the clear winner. It delivers the most confidence and is the easiest to get up to speed with, and its approach and departure angles mean your bumpers are the safest. If hitting the trailhead, camping, or even a touch of light rock climbing are on your agenda, this is the one to get. Forget about the bad tech and average fuel economy and let the Subie be your steed.