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

7147 messages,  Last post on Dec 05, 2009 at 5:13 PM

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

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

#6923 of 7147 Re: SUV comparisons [fushigi] by ateixeira Jul 31, 2009 (9:03 am)
Replying to: fushigi (Jul 30, 2009 12:02 pm) Careful, though. 2 things to consider:   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). Replies to this message: fushigi (Aug 01, 2009 12:15 pm)
#6924 of 7147 Re: RAV4 v. CRV v. Forester Post Test-Drives [ateixeira] by abbotsbury Aug 01, 2009 (8:49 am)
Replying to: ateixeira (Jul 30, 2009 9:18 am) I noticed that (raves in the press.) Baffles me. I took the car on very hilly, windy roads. It handles well but, again, the acceleration on inclines is sluggish and loud. And, BTW, this was a 2010 we were driving. Sluggish incline acceleration is a substantial pet peeve of mine.   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) $.
#6925 of 7147 Re: RAV4 v. CRV v. Forester Post Test-Drives [loach] by abbotsbury Aug 01, 2009 (9:25 am)
Replying to: loach (Jul 29, 2009 6:40 pm) Good question. Yes... we looked at quite a few of these:   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.) Replies to this message: tenpin288 (Aug 01, 2009 9:31 am) loach (Aug 01, 2009 7:07 pm)
#6926 of 7147 Re: RAV4 v. CRV v. Forester Post Test-Drives [abbotsbury] by tenpin288 Aug 01, 2009 (9:31 am)
Replying to: abbotsbury (Aug 01, 2009 9:25 am) 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.   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.
#6927 of 7147 Re: RAV4 v. CRV v. Forester Post Test-Drives [ateixeira] by abbotsbury Aug 01, 2009 (9:40 am)
Replying to: ateixeira (Jul 30, 2009 9:18 am) ateixeira:   "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. Replies to this message: vanman1 (Aug 01, 2009 3:28 pm) cbmorton (Aug 03, 2009 7:33 am) godeacs (Aug 04, 2009 9:06 pm)
#6928 of 7147 Re: SUV comparisons [robm2] by fushigi Aug 01, 2009 (11:59 am)
Replying to: robm2 (Jul 30, 2009 5:35 pm) robm2, the decision is simple and final. I won't consider a vehicle that requires premium fuel this time around. That $218 a year means I will have spent $2180 in 10 years. Is the Forester _at least_ that much cheaper up front?
#6929 of 7147 Re: SUV comparisons [ateixeira] by fushigi Aug 01, 2009 (12:15 pm)
Replying to: ateixeira (Jul 31, 2009 9:03 am) 1. You know, Mitsu has had that said about them for 15+ years. They're still here. The horse is dead; quit beating it. Is Oldsmobile still here? No. How long will Pontiac, Saturn, and FTM Chrysler be around? There are several doomed brands to avoid, but I'm not particularly worried about Mitsu.   And your link quotes the president of Mitsu:""We will never give up the U.S. market."   2. In my personal real-world history, resale plays in favor of the cheaper vehicle. I've already mentioned it in other threads comparing my '99 Galant to a similarly equipped Camry. The Camry would have been $3K more up front yet the resale is only $2K better after 10 years. The higher resale vehicle costs $1K more than the lower resale.   I don't have anything against Subaru, and being originally from Indiana I like that they build there, but their vehicles don't compare favorably against the competition in the criteria that matter to me.   Mitsu's biggest offense right now is the current gen Galant. It doesn't compare well to the competition at all. I wouldn't consider buying it to replace my current Galant even though my car has had great reliability and I'm a satisfied Mitsu customer.
#6930 of 7147 Re: SUV comparisons [baggs32] by vanman1 Aug 01, 2009 (3:24 pm)
Replying to: baggs32 (Jul 21, 2009 8:36 am) "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".   -----------   I think they want to get the attention of Ford Hybrid lookers. People think hybrids get better mileage than regular SUVs but that really only applies in the city. Hybrid highway mileage is usually very similar to non-hybrid models so if that's where you drive a lot, chances are you can save a bundle and get a Equinox instead.   That's my read. You are right though... the 32 MPG and over all mileage alone is very attractive and better than regular Escape or any other regular small SUV. Replies to this message: baggs32 (Aug 03, 2009 8:32 am) steve_ (Aug 03, 2009 8:39 am)
#6931 of 7147 Re: RAV4 v. CRV v. Forester Post Test-Drives [abbotsbury] by vanman1 Aug 01, 2009 (3:28 pm)
Replying to: abbotsbury (Aug 01, 2009 9:40 am) "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?" -----------   North American RAV production was to have shifted to Cambridge Ontario but when the recession slammed, the plant was put on hold. It's producing a little bit now but very small numbers from what I have heard. Toyota has way too much capacity and is loosing billions so who knows what will happen there. Replies to this message: cbmorton (Aug 03, 2009 7:33 am)
#6932 of 7147 Re: RAV4 v. CRV v. Forester Post Test-Drives [abbotsbury] by loach Aug 01, 2009 (7:07 pm)
Replying to: abbotsbury (Aug 01, 2009 9:25 am) Thanks for your reply. The only comments I have on your comments are with respect to the Murano, Equinox and Outback:   Murano - Although premium fuel is recommended, it is not required. Many Murano owners report good performance with regular fuel. Equinox - I would agree that the '09 and prior models may not stack up, but the 2010 looks like a game-changer. Outback - Not sure your concerns about cheap Subaru interiors apply to the 2010 model.   I don't expect any of these are things that will change your mind. Congrats on making your decision - I've got probably got a few more months of agonizing before I make one!

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