Last post on Jul 30, 2008 at 1:09 PM
You are in the Toyota RAV4
What is this discussion about?
Kia Rondo, Mitsubishi Outlander, Hyundai Santa Fe, Toyota RAV4, Mazda MAZDA5, Car Buying, Wagon
#6 of 271 Re: Rondo vs Outlander/Rav4/Santa Fe/Mazda5 [dnatoday]
May 17, 2007 (1:25 pm)
I think 95% of the 'utes out there are technically cross-overs -- basically just jacked up wagons with various forms of AWD/4WD.
#7 of 271 Re: Rondo vs Outlander/Rav4/Santa Fe/Mazda5 [bodble2]
May 17, 2007 (7:29 pm)
Mazda5 is a 6 seater so it doesn't meet your criteria.
If you are strong about "fun to drive", Rondo may not fit the bill. I didn't drive it, but I read few reviews and Kia's are not exactly known for this after all.
It leaves you with the Outlander, Santa Fe and RAV4. Out of all, I think the Outlander has the most "fun to drive", although the RAV4 V6 (you will have to get the LTD for 7 seats) and to a certain extent the Santa Fe are not bad either.
Of course, I would recommend you the Outlander as being the closest to meet your requirements out of the three.
You will need the Outlander XLS 4WD w/Sun&Sound.
On the side note, they all have 7 seats, but I don't think the 3rd row is of any use in any of them.
#8 of 271 Re: Rondo vs Outlander/Rav4/Santa Fe/Mazda5 [dnatoday]
May 17, 2007 (8:32 pm)
I agree with dodo2: Mazda5 and Rondo will not work for you.
RAV4 is nice overall, but RAV4 has shorter warranty then Outlander and SF. RAV4 has no free roadside assistance. Also it has too many little problems, according to owner feedback: on all 3 major sites RAV4 has lower owner satisfaction rating, then Santa Fe and Outlander:
---------- MSN autos -- edmunds.com --Yahoo Autos
Outlander - 9.5 -------------- 9.2 -------------- 4.5
Santa Fe -- 9.5 -------------- 9.2 -------------- 4.5
RAV4 ------- 8.6 -------------- 9.0 -------------- 3.5
Santa Fe is great, most upscale interior in the group, but little short on features, 3rd row seat cost extra as a part of package, only single CD-player and according to edmunds.com road test 5-speed "transmission sometimes slow to respond and unimpressive brakes". Still very pleasant car with great warranty.
Outlander is the best in the group to my opinion. It's fun to drive, smooth 6-speed transmission, better gas mileage then SF and best styling in the group to my taste. Standard Outlander XLS loaded with many features, some are not available even on standard Lexus RX350: 6 speed shiftable automatic transmission + paddle shifters (fun to drive), 18" tires, split lift gate, Fast-Key, keyless ignition, bluetooth, odor absorbing interior, LED rear lights, 6-CD stereo with MP3, roof rails.
Sunroof is not included in standard model but I would not care for it much even though I have it. Beige interior looks much nicer to me vs. black. 3rd row is tiny but is good for kids and when folded it does not take much space.
It has all the safety equipment: skid/traction control, electronic brake assist, ABS, 8 airbags, tire pressure monitor, hands free phone link. Unlike many other cars, Outlander offers tri-mode AWD, similar to Mercedes "4Matic": 2WD for better fuel economy, 4WD auto and 4WD locked. This car, I believe, expected to have good reliability since it is build entirely in Japan, and with amazing 5/10 warranty and 5 year road side assistance reliability is not a major factor. Roadside assistance would even replace you flat tire for free: just call 800 number!
I was offered standard Outlander XLS 2WD for $22.5K, but I ended up getting XLS AWD with most of the packages.
#9 of 271 Re: Rondo vs Outlander/Rav4/Santa Fe/Mazda5 [dodo2]
May 18, 2007 (7:09 am)
In response to the 3rd row seating.... This is my family's criteria as well. I believe I saw on the Mitsu. website that they don't recommend anyone over 5' sitting in them. We are merely having them as a backup if our sons - ages 8 & 12 bring a friend along and we can put the 8 yr old and friend in the back. If you are want something more of a wagon and not a crossover you may want to look at the Saturn Outlook - nice and big, the Ford Freestyle (we didn't like just because it's a Ford) or the Mazda CX-9 (very big like the Outlook). Of course since I am responding on a Santa Fe board I am partial to the SF and will be purchasing monthend. We did narrow our choices down to the Outlander, SF and Rav. Really liked the pep of the RAV, but for the $ the SF is such a better buy. We aren't 20 yrs old anymore and don't have to have the pep! The Rav also seemed so cheap inside to us in many ways. Good luck with your search. I initially looked at the Rondo and came to the conclusion of one of the other posters and dismissed it pretty quickly - reviews weren't so hot.
#10 of 271 Re: Rondo vs Outlander/Rav4/Santa Fe/Mazda5 [ppetroff]
May 18, 2007 (10:46 am)
Well, it appears the original poster is constrained by smaller and less expensive vehicles, but Outlook and CX-9 would not fit into it. So there is no way you could have full size 3rd row seat. Outlander's 3rd row is intended to be for smaller people.
#11 of 271 Re: Rondo vs Outlander/Rav4/Santa Fe/Mazda5 [ppetroff]
May 18, 2007 (11:57 am)
The reviews for the Rondo have actually been quite good. I and others have posted many reviews in this thread--for example, post #112 and #132 to #135. Out of the forty reviews or so that I've read, almost all of them tended towards the positive side. In fact, I could find only two reviews that I would deem as definitely on the negative side. As for comments from individual users in blogs and forums, I have no overall impression, but one can easily check out some of the comments in the Rondo forum. Anyway, regardless of the reviews, it might not be what the original poster is looking for, anyway.
#13 of 271 Re: Rondo vs Outlander/Rav4/Santa Fe/Mazda5 [medicineman]
May 18, 2007 (3:32 pm)
I agree on the Rondo reviews, but they should drive all the models and sit in the 3rd seat and that could possibly answer their questions. I find taking digital pictures really helps when I get back home and in a better position to absorb everything.
#14 of 271 Re: Rondo vs Outlander/Rav4/Santa Fe/Mazda5 [medicineman]
May 18, 2007 (5:22 pm)
I thank all of you for your well-thought out comments. I happen to really like the Rondo, but my husband (who drives an Audi S6, just so you know where HE is coming from!) wants the more fun to drive options. He is a gearhead and used to race Formula V & go karts. I on the other hand, only learned to drive 9 years ago after our eldest was born & I never went through that sexy race car phase-- the Honda Accord wagon was my first car. So I am not nostalgic for any performance attributes.
We did drive the 2007 Limited Edition Santa Fe today and man, is it sweet! So nicely appointed. It was moderately raining today and we went both up hills and on the highway. It handled both well-- with the minimal amount of road noise. When my husband drove, I sat in the 3rd row and it was very comfortable for someone who is 5'1". I loved having control over the heat from back there. And in the 2nd row, you can mess with the radio, provide you get the DVD player package.
The dealer is willing to give us a deal since it is a decked out demo car with about 6,000 miles on it (the dealership owner's daughter drives them for about 6K miles and then gets something new). Even cutting us a deal, it would be about 30,000, which is 8K more than the Kia Rondo all decked out.
To me it is a no brainer, but the hubbie is trying to get me to the Mitzu dealer tomorrow to drive that Outlander. It is very cute with some excellent audio knobage, but man is that 3rd row seat a piece of crap. The clamshell hatch opening is interesting, but what does it give you beside the ability to park closer to the wall in a garage?
We are definitely split on the necessary features. I will check in if I get convinced to drive the Mitzu & certainly let you know what I wind up purchasing!
#15 of 271 Re: Rondo vs Outlander/Rav4/Santa Fe/Mazda5 [dnatoday]
May 18, 2007 (6:27 pm)
Yeah, if your hubby is looking for driving fun, then the Rondo is probably not for him.
As for the third-row seats in the Rondo, it's definitely not for tall people (I don't think the third row of any vehicle is designed for tall people). I'm 6'1" and I can't sit up straight without my head touching the top, plus there's not enough legroom for me. I can make enough legroom by moving up the second-row seats, but that sacrifices way too much second-row legroom.
The third row in the Rondo can, however, accommodate people of shorter stature. My Dad, who is around 5'5", sat back there quite comfortably, although he said that he wouldn't want to sit there on a long trip. To make enough legroom for him, I had to move the second-row seat up some, which also meant I moved the front seat up some (this was all done on the passenger side of the vehicle). With everything adjusted just so with my Dad seated in the back, I could sit in the second-row seat comfortably with my knees just touching the back of the front seat. I could also sit in the front seat with my knees almost touching the glovebox.
So the moral of the story is, have kids or short adults sit in the back and there should be enough room for tall guys in the first two rows. If you have a family that's taller than I am or if they have very long legs (my legs are not that long for someone of my height), you should probably go for a Shaq-mobile.