Article Comments: Small AWD SUVs Comparison

151 messages, Last post on Mar 30, 2007 at 4:39 PM

You are in the SUVs Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester

What is this discussion about? Mazda CX-7, Toyota RAV4, Hyundai Santa Fe, SUV

Article comments for Comparison Test: Small All-Wheel-Drive SUVs - We've gathered three such vehicles for this comparison: the all-new 2006 Toyota RAV4, the 2007 Hyundai Santa Fe and the 2007 Mazda CX-7. It'd be uncomplicated to call these three "mini SUVs," but when they're loosely based on midsize sedans Toyota Camry, Hyundai Sonata and Mazda 6, it'd be more correct to call them midsize crossovers. (more)

Outline

Messages Page 9 of 16: 1; ...; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12; ...; 16; Prev; Next; Last

#72 of 151 Re: Hey! The CR-V won too [carfreak8] by sampowers Dec 08, 2006 (7:46 pm)
Replying to: carfreak8 (Dec 08, 2006 7:19 pm) Sorry dude, I love Honda, I have owned two of them. But the new CR-V's front end still looks like this guy--------> I really think you are employed by Honda, b/c you don't frequent the CR-V boards as often as you post here. How much is Honda paying you for all this advertisement? As it has been said in the past by may other posters...beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Not everyone cares about your values in a vehicle. BTW my wife HATES the CR-V's styling. So, it's defiantly not for every woman. Replies to this message: carfreak8 (Dec 08, 2006 8:34 pm) tidester (Dec 08, 2006 9:44 pm) srdriver (Dec 09, 2006 6:25 am) carfreak8 (Dec 09, 2006 6:40 am) aviboy97 (Dec 09, 2006 7:00 am) and 1 more...
#73 of 151 Re: Hey! The CR-V won too [joe97] by carfreak8 Dec 08, 2006 (8:17 pm)
Replying to: joe97 (Dec 08, 2006 7:17 pm) It may not be in the name of this forum, but the CR-V is more of a small SUV than the Santa Fe (midsize). So, the CR-V is more for this comparison, according to the title. I found those pictures and I liked them.
#74 of 151 Re: Hey! The CR-V won too [joe97] by carfreak8 Dec 08, 2006 (8:22 pm)
Replying to: joe97 (Dec 08, 2006 7:22 pm) Not all those sales are from the 06's. The sales were surely NOT half and half the first month, the sales were still up sustantially. Every one of those SUV's I listed would fit better with the title of this forum, so I felt like I should post a comparison between the CR-V and those.
#75 of 151 Re: Hey! The CR-V won too [sampowers] by carfreak8 Dec 08, 2006 (8:34 pm)
Replying to: sampowers (Dec 08, 2006 7:46 pm) I really think you are employed by Honda, b/c you don't frequent the CR-V boards as often as you post here. How much is Honda paying you for all this advertisement? As it has been said in the past by may other posters...beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Not everyone cares about your values in a vehicle. I do NOT work for Honda. I have NEVER worked for a car company. I just want people to know that Honda's are really good cars. Hyundai is not the lower price Honda. I feel they still have a little ways to go before they are there. I also get that people do not care about other peoples opinions, but know one would be hear if they were not voicing there opinions about cars. In the past, I have said that things were just my opinion. BTW my wife HATES the CR-V's styling. So, it's defiantly not for every woman. No car is for everybody. But, generally, the car was designed for women. The target buyer for the CR-V is a early thirties women and that is what the CR-V has been and is designed for. This obviously is not always who is going to like it (people have their own tastes), but this is majority buyer (women).
#76 of 151 Re: Hey! The CR-V won too [carfreak8] by cxrabbit Dec 08, 2006 (8:46 pm)
Replying to: carfreak8 (Dec 08, 2006 7:19 pm) "As for the price, it is very competitive, you can get a 2007 Honda CR-V AWD EX-L w/navigation for only $500 than a 2007 Rav4 4x4 Limited 4-cylinder w/leather and sunroof. That is a competitive price for its biggest competitor." Could be... but when it came to comparing it to the CX-7 it was a lot more money and lacked some things (basic things, like auto-headlights). The lowest I got Honda down to was still $3K more than a comparably equipped CX-7. But that was just for ME. I had a breaking point of $30K and would not go over it. I know I could have kept costs down on both cars, and could have gotten either for under $30K, it was just with more sacrifices on the CR-V... and ultimately, without that "spunk" I just would not have enjoyed it. CR-V is still a good vehicle. Replies to this message: carfreak8 (Dec 08, 2006 9:30 pm) piast (Dec 09, 2006 7:43 am) carfreak8 (Dec 09, 2006 9:09 am) and 4 more...
#77 of 151 Re: Hey! The CR-V won too [cxrabbit] by carfreak8 Dec 08, 2006 (9:30 pm)
Replying to: cxrabbit (Dec 08, 2006 8:46 pm) I never really looked at the CX-7 while I was looking at the CR-V and its competition. I just didn't really think of the CX-7 for some reason. I have since looked at it, and it was nice, but I can't do anything now. One thing I really like over the CX-7 was the reported gas mileage. Gas mileage is important, and that would have probably hold me back from buying, If I did look at it while searching. The CX-7 is a nice ride though and nice looking. I got the top level AWD EX-L with navigation (awesome system). It has been great, I do not really mind the power situation, or the auto headlights (I remember the time when they didn't have that at all) or the lack of power seats. I paid $28,000 and then I had added on the door visors and the roof rack (doesn't look so much like a wagon and now more SUV). I agree, the CR-V does not have the "spunk" of the CR-V, but doesn't bug me, I'm in my late forties and have kids who are moving out (only one left) and I don't need that fast stuff anymore (although I use to would have appreciated that). I like more interior stuff now like comfort and ergonomics. I still like my cars in perfect condition, and I have been around enough to know what quality is. Replies to this message: piast (Dec 09, 2006 7:43 am) carfreak8 (Dec 09, 2006 9:09 am) piast (Dec 09, 2006 10:00 am) and 3 more...
#78 of 151 Re: Hey! The CR-V won too [sampowers] by tidester HOST Dec 08, 2006 (9:44 pm)
Replying to: sampowers (Dec 08, 2006 7:46 pm) Not everyone cares about your ... Apparently, you cared enough to respond. Let's stick to issues and avoid the personal slings and arrows. tidester, host Replies to this message: srdriver (Dec 09, 2006 6:25 am) carfreak8 (Dec 09, 2006 6:40 am) aviboy97 (Dec 09, 2006 7:00 am) explorerx4 (Dec 09, 2006 4:13 pm)
#79 of 151 Re: Hey! The CR-V won too [tidester] by srdriver Dec 09, 2006 (6:25 am)
Replying to: tidester (Dec 08, 2006 9:44 pm) I think we will see the CR-V with a Turbo Version a bit later this year along with an option for the SOHC Honda V-6 with variable valve timing offered in 2008. I looked at the CR-V and several other vehicles before making my mind up on the 2007 Hyundai Santa Fe Limited. Replies to this message: carfreak8 (Dec 09, 2006 6:40 am) aviboy97 (Dec 09, 2006 7:00 am) explorerx4 (Dec 09, 2006 4:13 pm)
#80 of 151 Re: Hey! The CR-V won too [srdriver] by carfreak8 Dec 09, 2006 (6:40 am)
Replying to: srdriver (Dec 09, 2006 6:25 am) I think we will see the CR-V with a Turbo Version a bit later this year along with an option for the SOHC Honda V-6 with variable valve timing offered in 2008. I don't think Honda would put a turbo in the CR-V, because did not design the CR-V to be "fast", they wanted it more refined, and quiet. I don't think they were aiming at that at any time in the CR-V life or ever will. The RDX has the turbo, and it is a more "fast" car. The interior has more of a cockpit feel, and speedy feel. I do think the CR-V could see a V6 in 2008 or 2009. They could only gain sales by that move. If people do not mind the styling, people would not be able to say anything about lack of power (although it is fine now).
#81 of 151 Re: Hey! The CR-V won too [srdriver] by aviboy97 Dec 09, 2006 (7:00 am)
Replying to: srdriver (Dec 09, 2006 6:25 am) I think we will see the CR-V with a Turbo Version a bit later this year I doubt that. Honda did not spend all this time doing R&D to NOT put a turbo in the vehicle from the start. I think we stand a better shot at seeing a V6 in the next few years before we see a turbo. Replies to this message: explorerx4 (Dec 09, 2006 4:13 pm)