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: coldcranker (Dec 17, 2008 5:53 pm) You might want to hold off on making statements like that until we all learn of the applications first. There is talk of an EB I4 in the F150 in 2010 or 2011 probably to replace the base 2V 4.6L V8. Since you would be going from a V8 to an I4 in that case the gains very well might be 20% without any other mods to the model as in the case of the Explorer. But we don't know any of this for sure yet so I'll believe their claim until all of the planned applications are announced and tested.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: baggs32 (Dec 18, 2008 10:39 am) For the comparison to be valid, the power from the new EB I4 you mentioned needs to be equal (or nearly equal) to the 4.6L V8. I own an '05 F150 with the 4.6L, and it is rated at 231 HP and 293 ft-lbs. OK, you could get to that power level with an EB 4 cylinder of about 2.2L, but you would either need A) add a 6-speed tranny, or B) add alcohol injection, to get a 20% gain. Ecoboost alone won't do it.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: coldcranker (Dec 18, 2008 11:37 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: coldcranker (Dec 18, 2008 11:43 am) Let's get back to Acura vs. Toyota. RDX owners do complain about gas mileage so the concerns expressed above are valid. Plus you should use premium fuel. Toyota's 2GR V6 is plenty powerful, efficient, and runs on regular fuel. But we're only looking at the engine. I found the interior a bit lacking, and the swinging rear door opens the wrong way, blocking curb side loading. So I prefer the RAV4's powertrain, it's a shame the rest of vehicle isn't as good as the engine. To be honest the CX7 and Forester XT are more comparable to the RAV4, especially when it comes to pricing. |
|
|
Replying to: coldcranker (Dec 14, 2008 6:48 pm) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: aggie10 (Jan 12, 2009 1:44 pm) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: aggie10 (Jan 12, 2009 1:44 pm) Just a thought. 
|
|
|
Replying to: aggie10 (Jan 12, 2009 1:44 pm) How many seats do you need? Coming from the Sub, you will find the Taurus or even the Flex a bit lacking in cargo room behind the 3rd row. The GM crossover options offer a little more trunk room but still a downsize from the Sub. I know that we never saw a crossover or even a minivan that would comfortably take both our dogs behind the 3rd row like the Suburban does even though for some the published cargo volume was similar. If you can pile your luggage or cargo vertically, this is less of an issue, but our dogs don't like standing on each other. Do you have the option that we are considering, namely semi-retire the Suburban and keep it for the big family trips, but use a smaller 7 passenger crossover as the usual daily driver? Driving around town cargo capacity etc becomes much less important. With current trade in values, it's not as if the Sub is worth that much on the trade-in market. I would be very hesitant about buying a new Sub for just that reason - they are still expensive, but unlike it was 5 years ago, the depreciation on these big SUV's is now abysmal. |
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Jan 12, 2009 6:49 pm) Sorry, I said the M word again.  Seriously, though, the two desires here are space and value pricing, and the simple fact is a minivan wins big in both areas. Going from a Suburban to a Lambda you lose about 20 cubit feet. Going from a Suburban to a Sienna you actually gain 10+ cubic feet. That plus a van will be a whole lot cheaper. $22-35k instead of $30-40k or so.
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Jan 13, 2009 11:25 am) |
|
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
