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 Crossover SUV Comparison
7147 messages, Last post on Dec 05, 2009 at 5:13 PM
You are in the SUVs Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: biscuit_xls (Jan 24, 2008 12:12 pm) Not all are created equal. I for one have a 2.4L 4-cyl, basically identical to the one in the CR-V (2006 Accord, 166hp). It is easily as smooth as some V6 engines (like the ones in the old GM engine family). It doesn't make the CR-V fast, and some want that. No problem there from me - it's consumer's choice. It doesn't vibrate, regardless of A/C. A lot has to do with motor mounts.
|
|
|
Replying to: blufz1 (Jan 24, 2008 11:34 am) Both my wife and I were attracted to the Acadia, and slightly repulsed by the Pilot. But I can still be happy with the Pilot, since I bought an ugly Ford Aerostar in 95 against the advice of my wife and daughter. It has been very reliable. And my daughter once borrowed it to take the girls to Vegas. |
|
|
Replying to: blufz1 (Jan 24, 2008 11:34 am) Do you you have a weblink with this info? |
|
|
Replying to: volkov (Jan 24, 2008 11:41 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: bobw3 (Jan 24, 2008 3:06 pm) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Jan 24, 2008 1:12 pm) But I test drove all of the competing CUV's several times and found that the 4 cylinder RAV-4 and CR-V felt rough and underpowered compared to the V6 RAV-4 and V6 Outlander. And the fuel economy wasn't very different in all of the real-world data that I could find. Even the price wasn't significantly different when similarly equipped. I don't race my Outlander so 1 second faster 0-60 times aren't a big deal, but for me it's more enjoyable for the vehicle to easily merge onto the freeway and climb up hills when loaded with passengers. The V6 with 6-speed is a really nice combination, you should try one.
|
|
|
Replying to: biscuit_xls (Jan 24, 2008 10:46 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: biscuit_xls (Jan 24, 2008 12:12 pm) IMHO if you use it at all you should consider a larger vehicle. That's what we did, we have our big car, and now we're shopping for a compact crossover/wagon/SUV/dogsled whatever. I would consider an Outlander, but only the 5 seat model. I plan to check it out at the DC Auto Show this weekend, along with competitors. Looks like only the ES model comes with the base 2.4l engine/CVT? That would be a shame. You pretty much lose all the cool options.  For us this will be my wife's commuter/errands car. Doesn't need to be big, just big enough for 4, 5 on occasion, not too much gear (we use the big vehicle for that). If you've driven on the DC Beltway you'll understand why my wife wants an automatic this time, and something fuel efficient, so we're looking for a good 4 banger that is fun to drive, easy to park, nimble, and safe. I may end up going on Sunday, anyone else in the DC area going? http://www.washingtonautoshow.org/ Who knows, you might meet your Representative there... |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Jan 25, 2008 6:51 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: biscuit_xls (Jan 25, 2008 10:12 am) Outlander got 5 stars from NHTSA for that passenger (which is where my kid sits), so that's good. I didn't see an IIHS result, though, looks like it wasn't tested. Why not?  Forester also scores well in side impacts, in both NHTSA and IIHS tests, and that was before it even got side curtain air bags (new for 2009). I expect the new one to ace those tests. I think that we'll see a few of these 3rd rows begin to disappear when they start regulating and/or crash testing safety in rear collisions. |
|
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 GMC Acadia
2009 Hyundai Santa Fe
2009 Ford Taurus X
2011 Toyota RAV4
2010 Nissan Rogue
2010 Honda Accord Crosstour
2010 Dodge Journey
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
