I think the repeated "Xena and Gabrielle" comparisons Rachel and Cassie make about each other (and have made about each other) are a little eyebrow-raising in the 90s context. Xena was not a particularly heterosexual thing for a girl to be compared to in the 90s. The physical descriptions seem fairly normal outside of that, though.
I have zero memory of Cassie ever being compared to Gabrielle in the books nor any recollection of there being such a pop culture character as Gabrielle -- outside of the excerpt I included in my last post of course, which I didn't remember until I found it the other day -- and I'm guessing this reference may have been made exactly once by Cassie about herself and possibly zero times by Rachel about Cassie. As for Xena, Rachel constantly got compared to Xena throughout the series... not by Cassie but by Marco. "Xena" is practically his nickname for her. It referred to certain not-traditionally-feminine traits that Rachel had. To my reading, Marco repeats the comparison so often that the other characters begin to constantly associate Rachel with Xena as well, and maybe Cassie in a narrative description of her makes the comparison once or twice.
All this amounts to, as far as I can see, is that both Rachel and Cassie, while very feminine characters in their own ways, each have their own particular traits which buck traditional norms around femininity, yet each are happy enough in their own skin (Cassie occasionally sounds a little insecure about having some extra weight around her thighs but otherwise is fine with her looks and not being a supermodel-looking teenager like Rachel is) and each is totally accepting of the other. The fact that the two girl characters don't conform to many expectations of femininity and accept that in themselves and in each other is a beautiful thing and in principle I don't see why it should imply either of them falling into any kind of queer demographic, although I'm more and more beginning to get the impression that the umbrella of queerness is (at least currently) understood to encompass any sense of gender nonconformity whatsoever.
Not trying to be argumentative; I appreciate you sharing your take. Also, some of my memory of exactly what is said how many times in the books may be faulty here.