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 Honda CR-V 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
|
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
|
|
| http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=128409 | |
|
Replying to: richk6 (Jul 02, 2008 2:32 pm) 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. |
|
|
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. ???
|
|
|
Replying to: jopopsy (Nov 05, 2008 7:09 am) I completely disagree with that theory. The old one had struts all around, and the biggest difference is that it was softer. It took a while to settle down in a turn. Not bouncy in an SUV sort of way, just more softly sprung. The new rear suspension was derived from the Tribeca, and that plus all the other changes resulted in a Forester that rolls a lot less and feels firmer (the opposite of sloppy IMHO). You'll notice the reduced body roll on a test drive, and that's despite the fact that ground clearance is up more than an inch. The whole vehicle sits a bit higher. The trade-off is a little bit more impact harshness. If you hit a bump you feel it a bit more than in the '98. An enthusiast might see this as more feedback and even consider that a positive, but we use it as a family car so I wanted to note that you do feel the initial impact of the bumps more. Overall it has more suspension travel, though. I think it handles as well as any other compact crossover out there. MT just named it SUV of the year.
|
|
Trying to decide between the two which is better in the snow and sleet if both had excellent tires on them. This is important to me in deciding which to buy, I live in the mountains and get a fair amount of snow, sleet and ice. thanks for your help and input
|
|
|
Replying to: amiller1 (Dec 07, 2008 7:01 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: bodble2 (Dec 08, 2008 12:37 am) I had a 2003 Forester, the abs on this thing along with the tires sucked, while good in deep snow the rest of the time I felt unsafe. Slid across a major street from a side st, couldn't stop. My first generation CRV (can't remember the year) was good along with my gas hog 2007 Santa Fe which I traded for a 2008 CRV. Got the 2008 CRV last March so don't know how good it will be. Replaced the original tires with some Nokians just recently. Contrary to poplular believe there is no pull to the left or right. No rear diff noise at 12,000 miles, maybe at 15, but who knows. Traded the Forester for a 2003 Honda Accord, the dealer didn't want to take the Forester. However maybe the 2009 is an improvement, still no 5 speed auto though and the gas mileage is better on the 2008 CRV than the 2003 Forester.
|
|
|
Replying to: bj02176 (Dec 08, 2008 2:21 pm) And the 4-speed auto would be an instant deal-breaker for me too. But amiller1 was only asking about the snow-trekking ability.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
SUVs Honda CR-V Honda CR-V, Toyota RAV4 or Subaru Forester?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Honda CR-V
2011 Toyota RAV4
2010 Subaru Forester
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
