You are here: Forums SUVs Saturn Outlook Compare the CX-9, Veracruz, Pilot, Acadia, Outlook, Enclave and Freestyle

Compare the CX-9, Veracruz, Pilot, Acadia, Outlook, Enclave and Freestyle

7126 messages,  Last post on Nov 18, 2009 at 1:27 PM

You are in the Saturn Outlook Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester

What is this discussion about? GMC Acadia, Mitsubishi Outlander, Subaru Forester, Hyundai Santa Fe, Ford Taurus X, Toyota RAV4, Nissan Rogue, Honda Accord Crosstour, Dodge Journey, Car Buying, Car Comparisons, SUV

#6905 of 7126 Re: SUV comparisons [fushigi] by loach Jul 17, 2009 (7:06 am)
Replying to: fushigi (Jul 16, 2009 12:11 pm) I've eliminated the Rav4 due to the hatch and external spare as well. I'm eliminating the 2010 Equinox and Journey because I refuse to buy a car from the government. Looks like Murano is still my front-runner. Santa Fe was OK but just felt a little blah and boring to me. I haven't warmed to CRV styling either. Venza, Edge and 2010 Outback are still possibilities that I haven't driven yet. I haven't thought much about Outlander because the Mits dealer here went belly up a few months ago, but now I see the local Infiniti dealer has picked up the Mits line. Replies to this message: fushigi (Jul 17, 2009 3:05 pm)
#6906 of 7126 Re: SUV comparisons [loach] by fushigi Jul 17, 2009 (3:05 pm)
Replying to: loach (Jul 17, 2009 7:06 am) I dislike the government bailout as well, but that has actually encouraged me to give the domestics more consideration than I would otherwise. After all, if GM and Chrysler can recover, then we get our tax dollar investment back. If not, it's lost.   But that's a discussion for another thread. I'd much rather discuss the merits of the vehicles.   We will probably look at the Venza as well but it gets expensive fast. The Edge was a consideration but I think I'd like the Taurus X better.   Mitsu's dealer network can be a concern, I admit. But so can Subaru's. I'm in the Chicago suburbs, though, so it's not much of a concern to me. I drive by 2 Mitsu dealers and a Subie dealer on my daily commute. I also drive by the area Lamborghini dealer, but I haven't stopped in for a test drive.
#6907 of 7126 Re: SUV comparisons [fushigi] by mdphotog Jul 17, 2009 (5:35 pm)
Replying to: fushigi (Jul 17, 2009 6:57 am) I don't see cargo mats as a option for the Equinox but the way the seats fold, I don't think a cargo mat would work. Check out the interior photo gallery...http://www.chevrolet.com/vehicles/2010/equinox/gallery.do Will let you know about the Outlander. Replies to this message: fushigi (Jul 18, 2009 2:20 pm)
#6908 of 7126 Re: SUV comparisons [mdphotog] by fushigi Jul 18, 2009 (2:20 pm)
Replying to: mdphotog (Jul 17, 2009 5:35 pm) I see what you mean now. Don't think there's much you can do about that. I'm also not pleased that those back seats don't go any flatter. That means a lot less flexibility for trips to IKEA and other places where you encounter long, flat boxes.
#6909 of 7126 Re: SUV comparisons [mdphotog] by coldcranker Jul 20, 2009 (9:33 am)
Replying to: mdphotog (Jul 15, 2009 10:26 am) 2010 Equinox 4-cylinder gets 32 MPG highway with automatic tranny on the newly stiffened Theta chassis. Much better than the competition, and even beats the Ford Escape Hybrid's highway MPG, by the way. Beats everybody in the small-to-midsize SUV category. And I wonder if GM was using the new Goodyear Fuel Max (low rolling resistance, high traction) tires on it to get that. If they didn't use those in the EPA highway cycle test, then you would be able to add another 1 MPG to that already-good total. Replies to this message: baggs32 (Jul 21, 2009 8:36 am) coldcranker (Jul 28, 2009 7:32 am) vanman1 (Aug 01, 2009 3:24 pm) baggs32 (Aug 03, 2009 8:32 am) and 1 more...
#6910 of 7126 Re: SUV comparisons [coldcranker] by baggs32 Jul 21, 2009 (8:36 am)
Replying to: coldcranker (Jul 20, 2009 9:33 am) And I wonder if GM was using the new Goodyear Fuel Max (low rolling resistance, high traction) tires on it to get that. If they didn't use those in the EPA highway cycle test, then you would be able to add another 1 MPG to that already-good total.   Yeah, if you bought them and put them on your Equinox you would be able to up it by ~1 mpg. I doubt anyone will do that though.   Why all the fuss about the highway mileage only? The EPA says combined mileage is 26 mpg for the '10 Nox and 32 mpg for the '09 FEH ('10 numbers are not out yet). Now that's a big difference and truly worth noting given the fact that most people's miles are city miles these days. I know mine are.   GM should have just said it's better than the gas Escape because that is 100% true. Their ad has way too many footnotes next to that comparison to the FEH to be taken seriously IMO. Replies to this message: coldcranker (Jul 28, 2009 7:32 am) vanman1 (Aug 01, 2009 3:24 pm) baggs32 (Aug 03, 2009 8:32 am) steve_ (Aug 03, 2009 8:39 am)
#6911 of 7126 RAV4 for us by festivus Jul 27, 2009 (5:24 pm)
We test drove the rav4, the crv and checked out the equinox. Couldn't find a 4 cylinder equinox to test drive.   We went with the rav4 since we could get 4wd and a very fast 6 cyl engine without taking a big mileage hit. The crv was ok but acceleration wasn't great. Not horrible but nothing like the rav 4 with a V6. Also loved the color that we got with the rav4. Didn't like all of the chrome in the equinox. Heard from an acadia owner that the chrome is really bad when sunny.   The ride of the rav 4 surprised us too. We thought it was going to be really rough. Turned out to be about the same as the crv, maybe even better.   The swing gate is a pain, but not a deal breaker for us. We like the outside spare since it allows for a hidden storage area under the main cargo area. Great for laptops, etc.   Do yourself a favor and test drive a rav4. Replies to this message: coldcranker (Jul 28, 2009 7:17 am)
#6912 of 7126 Re: RAV4 for us [festivus] by coldcranker Jul 28, 2009 (7:17 am)
Replying to: festivus (Jul 27, 2009 5:24 pm) Yep, the fun factor of the Rav4 with a V6 is the best. I doubt if any other crossover or SUV anywhere near that price range beats the acceleration with one of those.
#6913 of 7126 Re: SUV comparisons [baggs32] by coldcranker Jul 28, 2009 (7:32 am)
Replying to: baggs32 (Jul 21, 2009 8:36 am) Granted, a hybrid is always going to get better MPG in a stop-n-go environment compared to a non-hybrid like the Equinox. Thats already well known and should go without saying. However, its notable that the Ford Escape Hybrid does get a little help from its electric motors on the EPA highway cycles, and the latest Equinox still manages to beat it there. The Equinox is already demonstrating the ability of a good direct injection system to help car makers meet the new tough EPA MPG CAFE standards. You can take nearly all the vehicles on this comparison list, add direct injection to them, and add about 2 MPG to the city and highway MPG figures just by doing that (which allows the compression ratio to go up a bit). As for the direct injection already on the Traverse/Acadia/Enclave, GM needs a little more time to develop control algorithms and bump the compression ratio up a bit for them to add a little more MPG.
#6914 of 7126 Re: SUV comparisons [fushigi] by ateixeira Jul 29, 2009 (9:23 am)
Replying to: fushigi (Jul 16, 2009 12:11 pm) Interesting comments, plus nice catch on the RAV4's wrong-way hatch. Though at least now you can get one without the spare blocking the rear view, though it means you'll get a donut instead. People who have been around for a while know I looked at the RAV4, fell in love with the 2GR V6 but not the rest of the car, and ended up driving away in a Sienna, which I felt had none of the shortcomings that the RAV4 had.   I find it a bit odd, though, that you rule out the Forester XT since it uses premium fuel, when it gets 2mpg better (EPA combined) than the Outlander you rave about. That should more than offset the extra cost, in fact per EPA estimates you'll actually spend less to fuel up the Subaru.   The Forester XT should also have a lower gas bill than the Santa Fe V6, which is nice but has fuel economy as one of its weaknesses.   If you can stay out of the boost, you should do really well. The XT is geared taller than the non-turbo models. Drive it like a WRX and you should worry more about speed cams than gas prices.   FWIW the 2010 Equinox looks great from the outside. Haven't checked out the inside yet. Is it a clone of the Vue? I test drove that but hated the numb steering, plus it was just too heavy.   Beating a hybrid in highway MPG is pretty meaningless since hybrids are optimized for city driving. Commute in both and the Escape will kill the 'nox, hands down.   Having said that 32 mpg is great for trips. Must be super-tall gearing. Sounds good to me. I wonder if real-world mileage will be that good, to be honest. Replies to this message: fushigi (Jul 29, 2009 7:13 pm) ateixeira (Jul 30, 2009 9:24 am) fushigi (Jul 30, 2009 12:02 pm) and 2 more... robm2 (Jul 30, 2009 5:35 pm) fushigi (Aug 01, 2009 11:59 am) baggs32 (Jul 30, 2009 9:09 am) stevedebi (Sep 10, 2009 2:58 pm) ateixeira (Sep 11, 2009 6:48 am) baggs32 (Sep 11, 2009 9:13 am) and 10 more...

You are here: Forums SUVs Saturn Outlook Compare the CX-9, Veracruz, Pilot, Acadia, Outlook, Enclave and Freestyle