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: redrose1 (Oct 23, 2009 1:15 pm) 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. Happy shopping. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: cbmorton (Oct 26, 2009 5:51 am) |
|
|
http://www.autoobserver.com/2009/10/word-on-the-street-the-secret-of-subarus-suc- cess.html Some excerpts: 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. |
|
|
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?
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: yvr1 (Oct 27, 2009 1:51 pm) Thats easy. The 2010 Mitsubishi Outlander GT is a much better crossover then Forester (and better then anything else in this class): 6-speed auto with paddle shifters and idle neural logic vs. dated 4-speed transmission. 40 GB mp3 music server vs. nothing. Premium 710-watt Rockford Fosgate stereo with 8 speakers + 10" subwoofer vs. generic 6-speaker stereo. Sirius satellite radio vs. nothing Outlander GT demonstrates spectacular handling: 66.2 mph slalom beating every CUV except for $95K BMW X6M with $500 sport tires. Larger 18" tires vs. 17 FAST key entry/keyless start (your key is always in your pocket) Voice control and Bluetooth music streaming Link System Diamond Lane Guidance real-time traffic navigation vs. basic navigation. Rear View backup camera. Parking sensors available. Superior AWD system with both front-to-back and side-to-side torque control, with Auto, Lock and FWD modes, form the manufacturer of 12-time Dakar champion. More cargo space, flap-fold tailgate and 3-rd row seating for kids. Rain Sensing Wipers vs. regular Xenon Headlights vs. regular More horse power and higher towing capacity 5/10 warranty + free roadside vs. basic warranty Top CR reliability rating. What Forester could offer instead? Larger sunroof, and thats about it. It's well build but basic car. |
|
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
