Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
SUVs Suzuki Grand Vitara/Vitara Suzuki Grand Vitara vs Toyota RAV4
42 messages, Last post on Sep 30, 2007 at 12:07 AM
You are in the Suzuki Grand Vitara/Vitara Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester
Well you have all seen the Grand Vitara now so what is the problem? For the money you are getting the best there is out there.The Grand Vitatra was voted the best Suv under $40,000 by TSN'S Motoring, And Voted Best New SUV by AJAC and Canadian Driver says it is a must see for anyone considering a compact SUV. So check them out you will be pleasantly surprised!
|
|
|
Replying to: leclerc (Apr 06, 2006 7:53 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: petl (Apr 06, 2006 10:25 am) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: alrod (Jun 07, 2006 1:33 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: alrod (Jun 07, 2006 1:33 pm)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: xostnot (Jun 08, 2006 9:15 am) Question - and sorry if I've missed a previous post about this - we've been reading a lot on edmunds about both vehicles - does anyone know what the engine size will be in the '07 GVs? My '00 GV is a 2.5l engine (I think), and the new ones are 2.7l. I've never had a problem with the engine size in my current gv, but it seems to be a serious topic among new gv owners. Any answers appreciated. Thanks!
|
|
|
Replying to: campdrafty (Jun 08, 2006 10:18 am) |
|
There is no way that the suzuki is bigger. The Suzuki looks small and low. And it is.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: avrguy73 (Jun 13, 2006 4:50 pm) Height on Suzuki - 66.7 in. Height on Rav - 66.3 in. Length on Suzuki - 176 in. Length on Rav - 181.1 in. Width on Suzuki - 71.3 in. Width on Rav - 71.5 in. Ground clearance on Suzuki - 7.9 in. Ground clearance on Rav - 7.5 in. Given all these similar dimensions, it is amazing that the Rav has a much bigger cargo capacity. It is longer, though, and their seats do fold down better. |
|
|
The '06 GV has really been taking in on the chin for poor mileage and a crude V6 from many corners, especially Rav4 fans. The epa rating for the GV is 30mpg CDN, while the V6 Rav4 is rated at 36mpg. Well, the other day I was driving on a flat, straight road, with no traffic to draft, and no wind. I waited until I was holding the speed steady, with the mileage indicator varying by no more than plus or minus .1 l/100km. At 110 kph, the GV was getting 9.8 l/100km, and at 100kph it was getting 9.0 l/100km. So I was thinking that the epa rating probably is for more like a simulated speed of 80kph, not 100. I slowed to 80, waited for the throttle to settle out, and checked the reading. 8 l/100km. That's 36mpg using the Canadian/Imperial gallon. It would be 15% less for the US gallon. It has just over 5000 km on it now. When it had 200km on it, driving at 110kph, on flat and level, with no wind, but in winter and with the roof rack crossbars and 5 pairs of skis on the rack, and the tires underinflated, it settled at 11.8 l/100km. So it appears to me that these results are consistent, and better than the epa rating now that it's nominally broken in, in warm air, with nothing on the roof, and with the tires inflated to the spec 32lb. pressure. AND, if this turns out to be typical, then it means all the criticism the GV has been getting, much of it credited to a crude engine, is simply wrong. And given the GV is always in AWD, it means it's actually doing better than Toyota's much-vaunted sophisticated engine and superior engineering. This is definitely worth keeping an eye on. |
|
You are here:
Forums
SUVs Suzuki Grand Vitara/Vitara Suzuki Grand Vitara vs Toyota RAV4
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Suzuki Grand Vitara
2011 Toyota RAV4
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
