Sign In Join 



Honda CR-V, Toyota RAV4 or Subaru Forester?

782 messages,  Last post on Feb 25, 2009 at 12:24 PM

You are in the Honda CR-V Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester

What is this discussion about? Honda CR-V, Toyota RAV4, Subaru Forester, SUV


Messages Page 73 of 79
1
...
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
...
79
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#715 of 782
Hyundai Selling Below Sticker by rochcom
May 19, 2007 (6:15 am)
Reply
"However, as Hyundai continues to sell its cars well below sticker, their resale will continue to lag."
 
If the original price is low enough, it may make up for the poor resale value at the other end, esprcially if it is kept a long time. The extended warranty (5/60 total, 10/100 drivetrain) makes that more likely. But for me, the gas mileage is the sticking point. It can greatly impact the cost of ownership, particularly if prices keep rising above the inflation rate.
#716 of 782
Re: Hyundai [stevecar] by drwoodr
May 19, 2007 (7:47 am)
Reply

Replying to: stevecar (May 18, 2007 3:58 am)

My insurance pays for a new car for the first 2 years of ownership, so everyone should check their policy on this.
 
While resale value is something to consider, it is just one of many factors. Getting an extra grand at trade in doesn't mean much if you don't enjoy driving your vehicle for the next several years.
#717 of 782
Re: Hyundai [drwoodr] by drive62
May 21, 2007 (6:18 am)
Reply

Replying to: drwoodr (May 19, 2007 7:47 am)

True. But I also look at it the opposite. If I pay a little more for a vehicle and keep it a long time the extra cost works out to less than a dollar a day (way less based on how long I keep a vehicle). For a reliable vehicle from a proven automaker that doesn't seem so bad.
#718 of 782
Re: Hyundai [drive62] by ateixeira
May 22, 2007 (10:08 am)
Reply

Replying to: drive62 (May 21, 2007 6:18 am)

I think we can all agree that the best strategy is simply "buy what you love".
 
If you prefer the Hyundai when its new, and pay more for depreciation, so what? You got a vehicle you liked better, and it's worth it. Why would you buy a car you didn't like (unless affordability was an issue)?
 
Residuals are often quoted at a % of MSRP. That's fine, but it's misleading.
 
For example, let's say you paid $25k for a Mini Cooper when they first came out, to be the first on the block. Retail was $20k. Resale in 2 years might be $18k. Sounds great.
 
The books will say it retained 90% of its value. Incredible. But it only retained 72% of the actual price you paid, and that is the *only* thing that matters.
 
The converse is also true. If you get a $20k vehicle (list price) for $16k, and residual after 2 years is just 60%, or $12k. Thing is, it only cost you $4k in depreciation. About half what the Mini Cooper cost that first-on-the-block sucker who simply overpaid.
 
Doing this sort of math required lots of assumptions, so that's why I say look at residuals, sure, but it's pretty secondary to liking the vehicle more.
#719 of 782
Consumer Reports Aug 08 by prndldriver
Jul 02, 2008 (11:29 am)
Reply
Just had to post that Consumer Reports looks at several 'smaller' SUVs including the Forester, Mitsubishi Outlander, Nissan Rogue. The Forester, in both XT and X versions, came out on top and is a recommended pick. In fact, CR says it is now recommending the Forester over its previous top pick, which was the Toyota Rav 4.
 
I am glad that perhaps CR finally realized the rear end on the Rav 4 is not practical for many people.
 
The Forester may not be the coolest looking SUV out there, but it is pretty solid and has the kinds of things that CR says it's looking for.
 
As for resale value, I would think that the CR article could only help the Forester and probably the Outlander.
#720 of 782
Re: Consumer Reports Aug 08 [prndldriver] by ateixeira
Jul 02, 2008 (11:33 am)
Reply

Replying to: prndldriver (Jul 02, 2008 11:29 am)

FWIW, I don't think they downgraded the RAV4, it's just that the Forester scored higher (turbo > V6, non-turbo > 4 banger).
 
To me the rear visibility and wrong-way opening rear door were turn offs, but if you read the CR review they barely glance over that stuff.
#721 of 782
CR small suv videos by richk6
Jul 02, 2008 (2:32 pm)
Reply
Here are CR online test videos of the small suvs from the aug 08 issue, including the new Forester.
 
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/past-road-test/small-suvs/videos-small-s- uvs/small-suvs-videos.htm
#722 of 782
Edmunds on CR's Forester XT choice by rsholland
Jul 02, 2008 (3:39 pm)
Reply
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=128409
#723 of 782
Re: CR small suv videos [richk6] by ateixeira
Jul 03, 2008 (9:39 am)
Reply

Replying to: richk6 (Jul 02, 2008 2:32 pm)

Holy cow, man, that's a rave review if I've ever seen one!
 
Interesting to hear that the 5 speed manual model was both quicker and more fuel efficient (24mpg is their best in class for a non-hybrid).
 
The better 4 bangers get 22mpg, and the automatic matched those, but the manual blew them away.
#724 of 782
CR-V / Forester by jopopsy
Nov 05, 2008 (7:09 am)
Reply
Hey Gang,
 
I've been reading that the double wishbone suspension in the new 09 Forester handles more 'sloppy' then the outgoing strut design. I took a 09 for a test drive and really couldn't tell a differance in the handling from my old 05.
 
Does anybody notice sloppier handling? Does the newer Forester handle more poorly then a CR-V? I always associated Subaru's with handling - this would be a first for me if the Honda does it better.
 
???

Messages Page 73 of 79
1
...
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
...
79
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement