Ask the Car People.SM


Outlander vs CX-7 vs Tribeca

263 messages,  Last post on Sep 19, 2007 at 8:05 AM

You are in the Subaru B9 Tribeca Forum.

What is this discussion about? Mazda CX-7, Mitsubishi Outlander, Subaru B9 Tribeca, Car Comparisons, SUV

Messages Page 24 of 27

#227 of 263 Re: Recent Edmunds Comparo [ateixeira] by aviboy97

Sep 14, 2007 (5:40 pm)

Replying to: ateixeira (Sep 14, 2007 12:40 pm)
Without the engine, the RAV4 sort of falls flat, but what I'm saying is the engine is probably the thing that will stand out the most on test drives.
 
I could not agree with you more.

#228 of 263 Re: Recent Edmunds Comparo [ateixeira] by chelentano

Sep 14, 2007 (7:40 pm)

Replying to: ateixeira (Sep 14, 2007 12:40 pm)
>> The average Joe will test drive these and can't feel the difference of 2 feet in braking from 60.
 
2 feet will make a big difference in an average Joe's collision

#230 of 263 Re: Recent Edmunds Comparo [chelentano] by ateixeira

Sep 17, 2007 (11:05 am)

Replying to: chelentano (Sep 14, 2007 7:40 pm)
Hee hee, funny, but that's something for the insurance companies to worry about.
 
It might affect safety is the stopping distances were a lot longer, but a 2ft variance is probably within the margin of error for that test, i.e. not a significant difference.

#231 of 263 Re: Recent Edmunds Comparo [ateixeira] by dodo2

Sep 17, 2007 (12:06 pm)

Replying to: ateixeira (Sep 14, 2007 12:40 pm)
It seems like many people, including myself, agree that the engine is the only thing that stands out in the RAV4. Is this enough to consider RAV4 the "benchmark" or "the best in class"? Personally, I don't think so.

#232 of 263 Re: Recent Edmunds Comparo [dodo2] by vbbuilt

Sep 17, 2007 (12:19 pm)

Replying to: dodo2 (Sep 17, 2007 12:06 pm)
Before I bought the CX-7 and a Santa Fe, I had the 2004 RAV4. What I liked about it was that it was compact, rugged. A might mite, if you will. I drive on the streets in DC and it's a snap to zip in and around traffic and finding a parking spot can be problem, but not for the RAV4!
 
Granted the swing gate can be a detriment, but you compensate for it and learn to live with it. I'll tell ya, I kind of appreciated the fact that the spare was mounted on the gate. Came in handy one cold dark stormy night when I had to change a flat. That sucker was real easy to dismount!
 
Now, it's undergone a pretty good styling overhaul and it looks a lot better than the 2004! The only reason I didn't buy the new RAV4 was I think the styling of the CX-7 is a whole lot better!
 
Vince.

#233 of 263 Re: Recent Edmunds Comparo [dodo2] by ateixeira

Sep 17, 2007 (12:20 pm)

Replying to: dodo2 (Sep 17, 2007 12:06 pm)
Probably not, but again, the engine is probably the most visible item. It's the first thing that makes impression on a test drive.
 
Test driver hops in, steps on the gas, "Wow, this thing is peppy". It makes you overlook the cheap-ish interior.
 
Then they look at the price tag, and the MPG is on the same sticker. So they might justify paying a bit more telling themselves they'll make it up on gas mileage (they will make up a small amount compared to other V6s).
 
You might say Toyota spent the money where it counts, or at least where the consumer would first notice it.
 
I have the 2GR engine in my Sienna, and I have to say, the engine is a gem. 266hp makes even this two-ton van feel fast, and I got 30.6mpg on two differnet road trips.
 
So my minivan did better than my MIATA did on the same trip, holy cow!

#234 of 263 Re: Recent Edmunds Comparo [ateixeira] by dodo2

Sep 17, 2007 (12:42 pm)

Replying to: ateixeira (Sep 17, 2007 12:20 pm)
What you said is true for the average Toyota buyer and maybe for the average car buyer; however the comparo we are commenting on is about ranking the vehicles against a set of given criteria, based on HARD DATA. The sales volume, resale value, brand prestige, perceived reliability and other subjective factors should not count at all and they are not included in the scoring system.
 
We all know that the emotional component is a big part of the purchase decision and a third-party, OBJECTIVE evaluation is meant to take that emotion out of the equation. This is the reason why the SUBJECTIVE component in this evaluation should theoretically total 5% only (which is not true unfortunately).

#235 of 263 Re: Recent Edmunds Comparo [ateixeira] by dodo2

Sep 17, 2007 (12:48 pm)

Replying to: ateixeira (Sep 17, 2007 12:20 pm)
So my minivan did better than my MIATA did on the same trip, holy cow!
 
I bet you still like way better taking the same trip in your Miata than your Sienna.

#236 of 263 Re: Recent Edmunds Comparo [dodo2] by ateixeira

Sep 17, 2007 (12:58 pm)

Replying to: dodo2 (Sep 17, 2007 12:48 pm)
Actually, it depends.
 
For the first hour, I prefer the Miata. Then it starts feeling cramped and I get wind-burned (the top is ALWAYS down).
 
Any longer than that, and I'll take the comfort of the Sienna.

Messages Page 24 of 27

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement