You have saved this page | See all saved pages
BMW X3 vs Subaru Forester XT vs Infiniti FX 35 vs Toyota RAV4
1193 messages, Last post on Apr 18, 2008 at 3:49 PM
You are in the BMW X3 & X5 Forum.What is this discussion about? BMW X3, Subaru Forester, Infiniti FX35, Toyota RAV4, SUV
#435 of 1193 Purity of Sport by ateixeira
Jan 30, 2004 (2:00 pm)
That's true, so we have to ask what the intended mission is for these utes.Given they're compact and sporty, I dunno, in that way the Forester XT is the purest of them. The extra weight is a pretty big compromise to have to make.
Look back to the BMW 2002, remember those? They were never about luxury. Sporty, compact, fun, light, quick, yes. Instant cult car.
When did window shades become important? Radar cruise control? To me, I'd say, wake up and drive.
I drove the X5 and the 530i wagon back to back and much preferred the 5 series, but the 3 wagon is just too small. At least the X3 offers more room, I'd have to drive one to judge, but reviews aren't encouraging.
I'm sure I'd prefer a G35 over an FX, too. Don't they make a wagon version for other markets? If that came here, I'd sure like to try a G35x wagon with a manual tranny.
Compared to a Legacy, Forester XT is actually lighter, more nimble, and (until the Legacy turbo arrives) much quicker. I should know, we own one of each. Forester adds a lot more fun and takes almost nothing away.
I don't think I could say the same about the X3 and FX vs. their wagon mates. They are heavier and less sporty.
Of course, when the Legacy GT (turbo) does arrive in 2005, I may just get that. We'll see.
-juice
#436 of 1193 swampy by ballistic
Jan 30, 2004 (2:02 pm)
and before ballistic kills me about leasing... thing i really like about leasing is having a new car every x yearsVery, very expensive proposition.
note to missle dude, i bought my fxt thinking that it would be reliable enough and i would drive in until it died with 200,000+ miles on it.
See? You've been reading my material for only a few months, and already you're IQ is shooting up.
#437 of 1193 by kdshapiro
Jan 30, 2004 (2:12 pm)
"very, very expensive proposition."Yes, but it's built into the budget.
"note to missle dude, i bought my fxt thinking that it would be reliable enough and i would drive in until it died with 200,000+ miles on it."
Note to self, never own cars more than a few years and get rid of them at about 100k.
#439 of 1193 SRX by exalteddragon1
Jan 30, 2004 (2:23 pm)
fully loaded is more than FX, but as an all round car its better IMO, C/D said its faster at the high end, that Northstar is really something.Does anyone here consider an SRX against any of the aformentioned cars in this thread?
#440 of 1193 Jack - by oregonboy
Jan 30, 2004 (2:41 pm)
ballistic: "See? You've been reading my material for only a few months, and already you're IQ is shooting up."The flip side is that some of the other posters' material is certain to cause brain damage! :o)
james
#441 of 1193 SRX by ateixeira
Jan 30, 2004 (2:50 pm)
SRX has a lot more room than any vehicle here, it's really not compact by any means.But...yeah, I would consider one if the prices came down to earth. I like Caddy's new styling and 2 kids and a nanny make the seating arrangement desirable for me.
Pacifica is (now) priced right, but it's not sporty enough, neither acceleration nor handling is up to my standards.
-juice
#442 of 1193 Pacifica... by ballistic
Jan 30, 2004 (3:03 pm)
...desperately needs the hemi, but it probably won't fit.#443 of 1193 Oregonboy, by ballistic
Jan 30, 2004 (3:07 pm)
Right. Some should probably come with a warning label: "May be harmful to your net worth."#444 of 1193 Dragon, by ballistic
Jan 30, 2004 (3:13 pm)
Who would have believed, ten short years ago, that GM would build anything as contemporary and competitive (in its niche) as the SRX?To POST a message, please
Sign In.
Advertisement
Most Popular in Forums
Search Forums
Enter Keyword(s):
Learn More, Do More
Edmunds Community
Advertisement