Last post on May 17, 2013 at 1:14 PM
You are in the SUVs
What is this discussion about?
GMC Acadia, Hyundai Santa Fe, Ford Taurus X, Toyota RAV4, Nissan Rogue, Honda Accord Crosstour, Dodge Journey, Car Buying, Car Comparisons, SUV
#7049 of 7326 Re: 2010 Subaru Forester 2.5 X Touring Package (Canada) vs. 2009 Santa Fe GLS [yvr1]
Oct 25, 2009 (8:53 pm)
The Santa Fe gives a lot of bang for the buck. I only drove the model with the four cylinder but will go back to drive one with the six.
Hyundai doesn't offer a 4-cylinder 2009 Santa Fe. The GLS (what you drove) uses a 2.7L V6 engine, with 185 horsepower and 183 ft-lbs of torque. It's actually quite smooth to me, even at high RPM, if not particularly quick off the line. For 2010, Hyundai is replacing that engine with a 4-cylinder delivering 200 horses and better fuel mileage.
#7050 of 7326 Re: 2010 Subaru Forester 2.5 X Touring Package (Canada) vs. 2009 Santa Fe GLS [thegraduate]
Oct 26, 2009 (6:51 am)
In Canada, the 2.7 V6 is only available on the GL FWD. The GLS uses the 3.3 exclusively.
#7051 of 7326 Re: 2010 Subaru Forester 2.5 X Touring Package (Canada) vs. 2009 Santa Fe GLS [redrose1]
Oct 26, 2009 (12:16 pm)
Subaru has several different systems, two on the Forester alone.
The manuals have a simple viscous coupling mating the front and rear axles together, acting like a center diff. When one rotates at a different rate than the other, the fluid sheers and thickens, temporarily locking the two axles together. Subaru lets their AWD systems act first, but as a backup there is also a traction and stability control system, to manage traction on each axle (if one side is slipping).
The automatics use a clutch pack to adjust the amount of power sent to the rear axle, and they manage both axles with traction control as well.
Hyundai's system is FWD based and on-demand only, rather than always engaged. It's a pretty basic system, AFAIK.
A bigger factor may be ground clearance and angles of approach and departure, where the Forester broadens its advantage.
A Forester XT (turbo) will easily outrun the much heavier Santa Fe even with the big V6, but the SF is bigger inside so consider your needs carefully. The Subie is CR's top rated small SUV, MotorWeeks driver's choice, and a MotorTrend comparo winner plus their SUVOTY so it's been the darling of the media as of late.
#7052 of 7326 Re: 2010 Subaru Forester 2.5 X Touring Package (Canada) vs. 2009 Santa Fe GLS [cbmorton]
Oct 26, 2009 (5:07 pm)
Sorry; forgot trim lines are different in different world-markets. Hyundai USA doesn't offer a GL model, only GLS (2.7), SE and Limited (3.3).
#7057 of 7326 Timely Article...
Oct 27, 2009 (11:38 am)
Most agree that Subaru has benefited greatly from the Forester's 2009 redesign, which earns nearly universal praise from our members.
[sales are] up 35 percent from the same period in 2008. That's mighty impressive considering industry sales were down 27 percent
But most insist that AWD-only is integral to Subaru brand in the U.S. and that if "they start offering FWD or RWD even on just a few models that... brand identity starts getting watered down." One post questions, "Is it worth losing your identity for a 10% gain in fuel economy?" Another argues, "They need to maintain the exclusivity of AWD standard; otherwise... they'd wind up being in the same position as Mitsubishi or Suzuki -- good but overlooked over for having nothing to stand out." And a third likens the potential effect of Subaru abandoning AWD-only to GM overtaking Saab in the 1990s, noting that Saab was "no longer the 'quirky car' once GM homogenized and pasteurized them."
In other words, it appears that the company, like the AWD drivetrain that it is known for, handles great in any kind of weather.
Let's keep in mind, though, the Hyundai is probably 2nd to Subaru in this economy, with sales decreases lower than just about anyone else.
#7058 of 7326 2.5 X Forester 2010 with Touring Package vs. 2010 Chevy Equinox
Oct 27, 2009 (2:51 pm)
I haven't gone back to Hyundai dealership to test-drive the Santa Fe with the 3.3L engine yet, but had one more vehicle to test-drive before narrowing down the list. Went to test drive an Equinox, and the dealer didn't even have any except in the showroom, but we did drive a 2010 GM Terrain, which he said was basically the same platform and interior as the Equinox; only difference was the exterior styling. I guess they're selling really well. In any event, after I drove it, I can't understand why. The steering and the brakes I found unresponsive. Brakes felt like mush and had to really press down to get the car to a full stop. Acceleration wasn't great. The two-tone colour scheme for the interior (brown/black) didn't appeal to me (don't these colours clash?). Even the much -vaunted sound deadening wasn't apparent to me. The only things I thought the Equinox had over the Forester was slightly smoother ride when going over bumps (at the expense of poorer handling) and a much better stereo system. I think the MRSP is a couple of thousand more than the Forester. Maybe the 2010 Equinox was such a vast improvement over the 2009 version, accounting for its newfound popularity?
I am quickly coming to the conclusion that the Forester is the best of the bunch when it comes to compact SUV's in the price range I am looking at (around 30K Cdn). Can anyone persuade me otherwise?