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 Saturn Outlook Compare the CX-9, Veracruz, Pilot, Acadia, Outlook, Enclave and Freestyle
7147 messages, Last post on Dec 05, 2009 at 5:13 PM
You are in the Saturn Outlook Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Jul 29, 2009 9:23 am) Not exactly just the tall gearing. There is an "Eco" button that must be pushed to achieve that EPA rating of 32 MPG. With it off the EPA rating drops to 31 MPG. I haven't figured out if it stays on when you shut the vehicle down and start it back up though. That could make a big difference in what people actually get. Here is a somewhat better explanation of the "Eco" button.
|
|
|
Replying to: abbotsbury (Jul 29, 2009 2:00 pm) An early congrats on the RAV4. What color? |
|
|
Replying to: fushigi (Jul 29, 2009 7:13 pm) We got the PZEV 2.5i X Limited model. For some strange reason, the PZEV Forester actually makes 5 horses MORE than the non-PZEV. Plus it's probably the lightest model in its class, so power/weight ratio is probably the best among the base 4 banger engines for the class. I'd like to say I did it for the environment but the truth is I'll take the 175hp version of the engine.  If you like sixes check out the new Outback 3.6l H6 models, EPA is 18/25 and they're smooth and powerful (same engine as the Tribeca in a lighter package). Plus it's actually tuned for 87 octane, the press materials say even the power outputs are rated with cheap gas. Toyota's 3.5l V6 is a great engine but I do wish they would let Subaru engineers tune their automatic transmissions. Toyota owns a portion of Subaru now.
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Jul 30, 2009 9:24 am) I'll grant the better fuel economy in the Subaru but it'd take a lot of years to earn back the higher price. And during those years, the Mitsu would have more warranty coverage.
|
|
|
Replying to: fushigi (Jul 29, 2009 7:13 pm) Let's say you drive your vehicle for a total of 160,000 miles over the next 10 years. That means an average of 16,000 miles per year. At a combined average of 22 MPG (which is what I get in the F-XT), that means you will consume 727 gallons of gas, per year. If the price difference between 87 and 91 AKI is roughly 30c, then that means it will only cost you $218/year extra, in fuel. Is that too much? The turbo's are very reliable on these machines. If you head to some of the Subaru enthusiast websites, you'd be hard pressed to find an OEM turbo failure.
|
|
|
Replying to: fushigi (Jul 30, 2009 12:02 pm) 1. Will Mistubishi be around to honor that warranty? They were down 42% last month and some analysts are suggested they should leave the US market: http://www.autoblog.com/2009/07/10/report-analysts-urge-mitsubishi-suzuki-to-exi- t-u-s-market/ Will they be strong enough to survive for 10 years, the length of that warranty? Something has to change. 2. Resale value. Subaru shines here. The residual for a Forester on a 3 year lease is 59% even with 45,000 miles. With 12k miles per year it's in the 60s, which is class best. ALG also gives them 5 stars: http://www.autoblog.com/2009/07/10/report-analysts-urge-mitsubishi-suzuki-to-exi- t-u-s-market/ Outlander gets 3 stars, but think about it - if Mitsubishi bails out of the US, your residual will plunge immediately. ALG dropped residuals on Chryslers by 8% the minute they went in to bankruptcy. So that's one risk if you keep it a long time (warranty), another if you don't (residual). If they give you big enough discounts to make the Outlander a bargain it may not even matter to you. $6 grand is $6 grand. You may get that much less when you sell it, but you won't have to pay the cost up front either. Mitsu is hurting, though, so there's no way they can sustain a business here in the US giving away their cars. Subaru is financially strong - sales are only off 0.8% this year, #1 among manufacturers. Plus IMHO the Outback is a lot nicer (in a higher price class so it should be).
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Jul 30, 2009 9:18 am) Frankly, I simply don't understand the rave auto press reviews. It's certainly a dramatic improvement, in terms of interior appointment, on the former Forester model but we weren't taken with it. Perhaps the turbo delivers far better performance. In any event, my cousin has an Impreza and his feelings about it are "meh." I was predisposed to like the Outback and Forester. Zero-for-two on that count. For the money RAV4 and CRV deliver more room for the same (or fewer) $. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: loach (Jul 29, 2009 6:40 pm) Outlander... my brother's colleague, a former CRV owner (from the period when Hondas were having reliability problems), currently has an '07 Outlander and likes it a lot. We didn't get past the showroom with one, however. The V6 probably rocks; however, the 4-cyl has the same hp as the CRV (so probably the same sluggishness on accel.) and the cargo volume is midway between the RAV and the CRV. The '07 redesign dramatically improved reliability, according to Consumer Repts. In the showroom, what turned us off was the interior materials... cheap like the Subarus. The RAV4 and CRVs felt much nicer inside... and that's where we spend our time while driving :>). CR says lots of road noise and stiff ride... still, CR recommends this model. Santa Fe... a little bigger than we wanted... it's in between the RAV4 and Highlander in size. Lower mileage and only comes in a V6. Again, the performance of the upgraded RAV4 4-Cyl won us over. Gives us the juice we need and great (relative) mileage. Also, Hyundais have good reliability reputations recently; however, Toyota and Honda are just money in the bank (even with the recent Toyota stumbles.) We concluded no reason to buy a Hyundai when we can get a CRV or RAV4. Finally, (although I didn't research it thoroughly) my impression is that the Santa Fe and Tuscon don't hold their values as well as the CRV and RAV4. Nissans... not big fans of either the Rogue or the Murano. The Murano is a bit heavy (4100 lbs.) and it's fuel economy not great c/w the RAV and CRV. Then there's the premium-gas-only issue for the Murano. For the money CRV & RAV give more room and better mileage. The Murano seemed a little squat when we looked at it. Toyota Venza... chasing the Murano in concept and marketing. Comfy and posh inside. We liked the RAV4 better for our $. Weren't really interested in driving it so can't comment further. In the showroom we noticed dramatically less legroom in the back seat c/w the RAV & CRV. Less cargo room. Just didn't interest us. Chevy Equinox... Consumer Repts rates the '09 model as having rock-bottom customer satisfaction, below avg reliability and fuel economy, and terrible body integrity. Also poor handling, poor ergonomic design in cabin, unstable rides at hwy speeds. I can't imagine that GM, having plunged into bankruptcy, magically fixed all of that in one swoop. Frankly, Detroit has lost us, probably for the remainder of our driving days. I see no compelling reason to look at any of its cars, redesign or no. Only Ford seems to have gotten its act together reasonably well. Was admiring a Fusion on the road yesterday. Really, I kept coming back to a bottom line... we saw no reason (in terms of reliability, cost, performance, safety and resale value) given that we liked the RAV and the CRV to venture beyond Toyota and Honda right now, both of which my wife and I and many in my extended family have owned during the past 20 yrs. (Our most recent cars have been an Acura CL and a Honda Civic.) The RAV & CRV are neck-and-neck at the top of the chart in reviews of this car category. Hope this helps. Anyone please correct me if I've missed something. We've been mulling this purchase for more than three years (we were living in Canada for a while, where cars are very expensive and the retail sector is like the US' was in the 70s, and wanted to wait until we moved back to the US to buy a new one.)
|
|
|
Replying to: abbotsbury (Aug 01, 2009 9:25 am) Depending on when you are looking to purchase your vehicle, the 2010 Santa Fe is due out at the beginning of the year. There will be some styling changes, new options and trim levels, a few minor suspension and steering tweaks, and a direct-injected 4cyl good for 200hp and much improved fuel economy over the current 3.3 V6 (which also gets direct injection, a bump to 3.5 ltr and more power and economy). Might be worth checking out if you haven't purchased by then. 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Jul 30, 2009 9:18 am) "It's not just Subaru Cultists that like the new Forester, it won Motor Trend SUV of the year, comparos in Automobile, MotorWeek Driver's Choice best small utility, and the XT model is Consumer Reports highest scoring small SUV as well. Forester won over the press, big time. An early congrats on the RAV4. What color? " Sorry, ateixeira, in my earlier reply I didn't address color. Actually, this is the big shortcoming of the '09 RAV in our opinion compared with the CRV. The '08 had a sort of greenish-gray color we both liked a lot but the '09 model didn't offer it. The CRV's colors are much more appealing to us. The Glacier Blue and Green Tea especially appealed to my wife (savvy marketing by Honda!). In the RAV we liked the Pacific Blue but that's the color of our Acura and we'd like something different. The red with the tan interior is OK, too. We're going to wait until October to see if the '10 RAV color schemes offer something we like better. We sold the Civic but right now we don't need a second car for a while. We'll buy at some point during the fall when inventories kick up. I notice a big drop in RAV4 inventories on lots this past week compared with when we looked in April. Was hard to find a Limited 4WD 4-banger to drive. One final note about the rear gate on the RAV (the left-hand-side-opening door.) I noticed that the three or four RAVs we looked at last week were all built in Japan, not in the U.S. I found that odd (since nearly all the Hondas I have seen are built in Ohio.) Perhaps Toyota hasn't tooled a US factory to build the RAV, so it has one set of tooling for the Japanese market (driving on the left-hand side of the road) and uses those cars for export to the US. Does anyone know whether the RAV is built in the US? When we lived in Ontario Toyota was building a new factory there to open in '08. I wonder whether it will build RAVs for the North American market.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
SUVs Saturn Outlook Compare the CX-9, Veracruz, Pilot, Acadia, Outlook, Enclave and Freestyle
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
