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
7138 messages, Last post on Dec 04, 2009 at 4:59 PM
You are in the SUVs Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester
|
Replying to: mf15 (Sep 24, 2009 7:59 am)  Mitsubishi's poor sales are actually a positive for you as it will make the dealership more willing to negotiate price with you. Granted, if you are planning to trade the car in less than five years later, the worse than average depreciation will be a factor to consider. http://www.intellichoice.com/reports/vehicleReport/vehicle_nmb/41013/2009/Mitsub- ishi/Outlander From a reliability perspective, the Outlander should not give you any troubles. http://www.edmunds.com/new/2009/mitsubishi/outlander/101068582/reliability.html
|
|
|
Replying to: psychogun (Sep 24, 2009 8:43 am) I actually like the new EVO face, unlike mf15. Mazda does indeed gear very short, even in 6th gear my Miata's rpm are too high at highway speeds. It needs a 7th, maybe even 8th, cruising gear! The Miata's range is also poor, with a small fuel tank, but I can accept that given that car's mission. I just hate having to get gas every 5 days. My van has a 21 gallon tank and can go nearly twice as far between fillups. |
|
|
Replying to: psychogun (Sep 24, 2009 9:07 am) I signed up to be alerted when it becomes available. My current car, a '99 Galant with 151K miles, has been more reliable than any car I've ever owned, including a Camry, Sentra, and Mazda MX-3. That 3L V6 is a very nice engine.
|
|
|
Replying to: fushigi (Sep 24, 2009 5:20 pm)  They shouldn't get ahead of themselves, though, the current Outlander doesn't have S-AWC, but rather plain ol' AWC, without the S. They use the same name for the system in the EVO, though I doubt it's the same (more a brand name I suspect). I like the EVO grille and those 7 spoke rims are also nice.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: mf15 (Sep 21, 2009 5:52 pm) my wife looked looked at MZX, Edge Limited, and Escape Limited. there are huge improvements in the '09 Escape, all for the good. the 2 things you can't get in the escape are cooled/heated front seats (heated only) and power rear lift gate. even with 20% more horsepower, it is getting about 20% better fuel mileage. |
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Sep 25, 2009 7:51 am) Only the V6 versions of the Outlander will feature S-AWC (indeed the same as found on the Evo, though less stoutly built since less stress will be exerted by the 3.0l V6). |
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Sep 11, 2009 11:35 am) Wow, that's even a FWD model, AWD would do worse. Back to the Equinox again. Edmunds just tested a 2010 FWD I4 and the best they could do was 21 mpg which is still below the EPA city rating. How did the EPA come up with 22 city and 32 highway exactly? Was it their downhill while drafting a semi test or what? Or did GM do this rating for them (which happens more often than you would think) and they took their word for it? All in all they are still impressed with the new 'Nox. But that FE GM keeps touting is starting to look like a big fat lie. Link
|
|
|
Replying to: baggs32 (Sep 29, 2009 8:53 am) I guess what works on a dyno inside a lab doesn't necessarily translate in the real world. The reviews complain about the reluctancy of the tranny to downshift, so drivers may have been compensating for that by adding more throttle. Ironically the result is poor mileage, when the original aim was to improve efficiency. I still think it looks good inside and out. Imagine what that powertrain could do it if weighed a bit less than its 3,783 lbs.
|
|
|
http://carscoop.blogspot.com/2009/09/2010-toyota-rav-4-introduces-new.html Same 179hp 2.5l from last year, but they made a backup came standard even on the base model. Good idea. It's the type that is in the rear view mirror. Sport package mandates run-flats - deal killer for me after all the negative feedback in the Sienna threads. It gets the spare off the back, but now that you have a backup cam, I'd pick the spare over the run-flats any day. |
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Sep 29, 2009 10:32 am) Good point. Our Enclave was the same way. It upshifted way too early so we were always having to get on the gas to get it to downshift to have enough power. GM came out with a software update for the tranny with the warning that it would/could have a negative impact on mileage. It delayed the shift points and the TC lock-up. The update made the vehicle shift like it should have in the first place. Our mileage did not go down at all, and may have increased ever so slightly. Moral of the story - what is good for mileage ratings may not be good in the real world. |
|
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
