- #30 of 45
-
Re: RAV4 V6 vs. CX-7 [Sporin]
by maxrossi
-
Jan 08, 2009 (1:45 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: Sporin (Jan 09, 2006 2:30 pm)
My first experience with the RAV4 was test driving it in a V6. I was impressed with its power to the point where it had me questioning why would Toyota put this much power under the hood of a compact SUV. Considering the gas mileage is almost identical to the 4 cylinder, I thought perhaps it was not worth even test driving the 4 cyl. However after some thought and analysis, I noticed that the 6cyl. cost about 2000 dollars more than the 4cyl. and will also eat up brakes and tires much quicker than the 4 cyl. With that in mind I test drove the 4 cyl. engine. Although I have always gone for the bigger is better approach, this time around I was more careful. I noticed the 2.5 4 cylinder had plenty of torque and pep and was better suited for the RAV4 in everyday driving. So I bought one in the 4 cylinder. Now that I have been driving it for 2 weeks, I love it. It is quiet, smooth and has plenty of power on and off the highway. As a matter of fact, Toyota will put this 4cylinder in its bigger Highlander for late 2009. So considering the extra mile or 2, I get per gallon, coupled with the initial 2000 dollar savings on the smaller engine, the 4 cyl. is a great chioce. Hey, who knows where gas will go in the future. It was 5 bucks a gallon only 6 months ago and since then it has dropped over 100 dolllars a barrel to a 1.34 per gallon price. I think 2009 will be the year Americans start to focus more on saving then spending. After all that is what has got us in all this trouble to begin with. "out of control spending". Waste less, save more and you will come out ahead.
|
- #31 of 45
-
Re: Toyota Rav4 V6, Mazda CX-7, Honda CR-V comparison [dmele426]
by almatti
-
Jan 08, 2009 (9:16 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: dmele426 (Jan 08, 2009 12:47 am)
I have a CRV EX-L 2007 too. A Very, very good car for it's intended purpose - a CUV with AWD. My wife loves it. We're in the same gneral area that you are - Westchester Co, NY. I definetely agree with you, It's a "chick" car, even Honda's literature will tell you that. It was designed specifically for women with young children - easy access, a "cute" look to it, etc. I too liked the Mazda CX-7 , a lot. test drove it, didn't like the turbo lag and seeing the poor mileage results reported here and other sites. If it had the 3.0 Duratec V-6 , the one that was in the Mazda 6 (2005 that was totalled - not even a scratch with my son driving at UMASS - flipped over on Black Ice), I would have taken that in a nanosecond.
|
- #32 of 45
-
Re: Toyota Rav4 V6, Mazda CX-7, Honda CR-V comparison [almatti]
by typesix
-
Jan 09, 2009 (8:35 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: almatti (Jan 08, 2009 9:16 pm)
It may be advertised as a "chick" car but I see plenty of men driving them in Boston area. Prefer the previous generation boxy look with its superior cargo space and visibility, only feature better in current generation is the upward folding cargo door.
|
- #33 of 45
-
Re: Toyota Rav4 V6, Mazda CX-7, Honda CR-V comparison [blueiedgod]
by phisher
-
Jan 09, 2009 (10:09 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: blueiedgod (Jan 08, 2009 10:37 am)
You and your damm hatred of the slush box. 
|
- #34 of 45
-
Re: Toyota Rav4 V6, Mazda CX-7, Honda CR-V comparison [phisher]
by blueiedgod
-
Jan 09, 2009 (11:00 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: phisher (Jan 09, 2009 10:09 am)
You and your damm hatred of the slush box.
Clutch Saves gas!
Praise the Clutch!
Clutch is the answer to all of your congestion problems!
Banish that automatic to the Heidies where it came from!
|
- #35 of 45
-
Re: Toyota Rav4 V6, Mazda CX-7, Honda CR-V comparison [blueiedgod]
by wwest
-
Jan 09, 2009 (2:13 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: blueiedgod (Jan 09, 2009 11:00 am)
Putting a clutch in a FWD or F/awd vehicle would do nothing but make the automotive insurance companies profits SOAR..!!!
|
- #36 of 45
-
Re: Toyota Rav4 V6, Mazda CX-7, Honda CR-V comparison [wwest]
by steve_ HOST
-
Jan 09, 2009 (8:15 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: wwest (Jan 09, 2009 2:13 pm)
I had a 5 speed FWD for 17 years and the insurance was cheap. I don't hear Subaru owners with MTs complaining about their insurance rates either. I don't think there's any factual basis for your assertion.
|
- #37 of 45
-
Re: Toyota Rav4 V6, Mazda CX-7, Honda CR-V comparison [steve_]
by wwest
-
Jan 09, 2009 (10:19 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Jan 09, 2009 8:15 pm)
Just have a look at how many FWD sticks are now discontinued.
|
- #38 of 45
-
Re: Toyota Rav4 V6, Mazda CX-7, Honda CR-V comparison [wwest]
by steve_ HOST
-
Jan 09, 2009 (10:38 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: wwest (Jan 09, 2009 10:19 pm)
Yeah, but it's not because of insurance or safety. Can't eat, drink the Starbucks, and drive stick too good.
The Future Of The Manual Transmission
|
- #39 of 45
-
Re: Toyota Rav4 V6, Mazda CX-7, Honda CR-V comparison [wwest]
by tlong
-
Jan 09, 2009 (10:59 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: wwest (Jan 09, 2009 10:19 pm)
Just a thought, people should consider the Mazda 5. Very highly rated, it is like a very small minivan or wagon (only considered like a minivan because of sliding doors). We cross-shopped the CRV with the Mazda 5 and chose it because:
- higher than a car but lower than an SUV
- MUCH better handling with extremely tight turning circle - handles like a Mazda 3
- Seats 6 in three rows, but can fold rear seats for cargo room
- Bargain priced, fully loaded with nav, leather, bluetooth, heated seats around $25K
- Outstanding crash test scores
- Better mileage than CRV or RAV4
- Sliding doors mean no doors swinging out in tight parking spots
- Available with a stick shift if desired
|
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
SUVs 
