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 Nissan Rogue Nissan Rogue vs Honda CR-V vs Toyota RAV4
125 messages, Last post on May 06, 2009 at 8:52 AM
You are in the Nissan Rogue Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester
|
Replying to: jd10013 (May 27, 2008 11:26 am) There are so many folks on the road today that have no experience/training with MTs. Since the CVT and MT both offer similar fuel efficiencies, it will be interesting to see if it's the CVT or the MT that picks up in popularity as gas surges to $5.
|
|
|
I have a tear drop trailer that weighs 1500 lbs I want to tow with my Rogue. The towing capacity is 1500, but that's unladen, so I thought I'd use a weight distributing hitch to compensate for any excess. Does anyone have experience towing with the Rogue? |
|
|
Replying to: captain2 (May 28, 2008 5:19 am) For the CRV, mainly the performance is the key issue. I think Honda should put the new 2008 Accord top 4-Cyl engine in it. That engine has 190 horses with 162 pound ft. of torque I think the CR-V will be more competitive with that engine will increase the CRV performance & fuel economy, also adding a lockable 4wd button and a faster wheel slippage reaction time for the all wheel drive to engage the rear wheels
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: taz16 (Jun 01, 2008 10:16 am) That engine has 190 horses with 162 pound ft. of torque I think the CR-V will be more competitive with that engine will increase the CRV performance & fuel economy Increased performance wouldn't be noticed much, especially at normal operating RPMs (under 4,000). Torque is pretty much unchanged, and the peak horsepower in the 190hp version doesn't come until around 7,000 RPM. Increased fuel economy is unlikely as well; it went unchanged from the 166hp to the 190hp Accord. If anything I do think the 2010 CR-V will offer something like th 177hp version that is in the LX Accord, with its lower redline and power peaks. |
|
|
|
|
just came back from a 2100 mile round-trip from VA to FL with 4 adults, 5 suitcases and 2 duffle bags ( we were driving down to Port Canaveral for a 5 day cruise - definitely the way to go, given airlines are now penalizing you for carrying more than one suitcase!!!). used a samsonite soft-top on the roof-rack. a little tight, but comfortable enough for th 13+ hour drive down and 15+ hour drive back (coming back, took two days) absolutely no problems with acceleration loaded down - for a 4 cyl. - and loaded down, averaged about 22 mpg (with poor wind resistance because of the soft top). in 100 degree+ weather in FL, A/C worked great and didn't seem to tax the engine at all; lots of positive comments from people thinking it was a Murano (i tell them it's the Murano's younger brother, that takes REGULAR gas, not PREMIUM!, and better mileage). absolutely NO mechanical problems at all during the whole trip. Pluses: very good mileage; very good performance for a 4 cylinder loaded down (remember, this is NOT a Honda Accord V6 with 6Manual!), CVT worked wonderfully - with not a hitch and smooth acceleration, fair comfort for 4 adults (of course, previously we were spoiled with a Grand Caravan Sport, so not fair to compare), XM radio and bluetooth were great. Minuses: a little cramped, and difficult to pack (what do you expect for the size), bottomed out a couple of times (we were probably maxed out on the GVWR), but no damage other than a scraped bottom of trailer hitch, wished the back seat would recline, wished for extra power plug in the back, rogue now has over 22,000 miles since 12/07, and no problems. took it to oil change after trip and all they recommneded was replacing the air filter (which looked fine to me, so i told them i'd replace it later)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: tamoshanter (Jun 03, 2008 10:40 am) As far as the air filter goes, if you can get to it easily, replace it yourself and save the big bucks. My dealer charges $30 for it to be put in, so I bought a $9 one made by STP and put it in my Honda myself. A penny saved is a penny earned, but 2,000 pennies is lunch for two! 
|
|
|
Replying to: taz16 (Jun 01, 2008 10:16 am) As far as the lockable AWD - well yes it is and no it isn't - simply because it turns itself off (reverting back to FWD only) at speed. I could see it being valuable in the snow country though along with the switchable Stability Control. |
|
|
Replying to: blufz1 (Dec 13, 2007 2:55 pm) 1) Rogue rides much better, not as "busy" as the RAV. Handles tighter. Wind noise seems much less at 65-70 MPH in Rogue. Road noise also. Rogue much better in crosswinds. 2) RAV accelerates faster, both from standing start and highway pass, but Rogue isn't at all lazy. 3) MPG on Rogue is better. 33 avg on first three tanks in Rogue vs 27 in 30k miles in RAV. 4) Rogue seats more comfortable, more supportive on sides and lumbar areas 5) RAV interior is more practical: less cloth, more plastic, especialy on doors; many more storage cubbies; more cupholders; Huge storage well in rear where 3rd seat would go. Rogue hasa smaller one back there with its touted dividers, which don't seem all that useful, especially if you use a load blanket. 6) AT gearbox in RAV is constantly hunting, thus annoying. Not so in Rogue. Plus the paddles up the fun factor nicely. The Rogue actually has seven forward speeds so, once it's broken in, one should be able to work the power band better in the Rogue. The Rogue gearbox feels tighter, less slushy. But it would be nice if the Paddles were in a fixed location when steering large lock. However, one can still gear up/down with the console lever. One neat trick on the CVT is that you can remain in full Auto mode and trigger the manual briefly by just pulling a paddle, after a bit it will return to "D" (auto) by itself. No need to change modes. Found that to be very handy at times. 7) Rear visibility has glitches in both, although at different spots. Side visibility from Rogue is better. The non-removeable rear headrests are a serious flaw in the Rogue, IMO. Doesn't bother us since we have rear seats down 99% of the time. But when they're up rear visibility is seriously compromised. If that wasn't the case the rear visibility could be a deal-breaker for us. 8) The way the CVT holds speed downhill is useful. HAve yet to try it in crawl mode to compare with RAV's hill brake. 9) Service people seem more friendly with Nissan around these parts. 10) Ground clearance slightly better in Rogue. 11) Audio system in Rogue sounds better. 12) Can tow a bit more with RAV. 13) Mirror adjustment control location is more user friendly on Rogue, but the VSC and AWD controls are better located on the RAV. 14) The OEM tires on Rogue (Conti 4x4 Contact) are not as good as RAV (loud, only 6/32 tread on the Rogue's Contis at 19 miles!). 15) The conventional (vertical) hatch on the Rogue is more convenient. Sounds like that's going to change next model year. 16) RAV comes stock with full-size spare. Rogue has temp. However, you can change that by removing the aft storage locker and replacing the donut. But that does give up that small partitioned storage bin mentioned above. 17) Am not sure yet if the Intelligent Key is a boon or not. However, the price to replace one seems less expensive than the RAV or even a Honda FIT. 18) No locking fuel door. However, the RAV's flimsy door won't stop anyone. Both are good, small utilitarian rides, but we feel the Rogue offers better value for the price which around here is substantially less than RAV. We realize much of the above is subjective, but that's our $0.02. HTH.
|
|
|
Replying to: dcwestby (Apr 17, 2008 7:37 pm) Comparing the CVT in the Freestyle vs Rogue would be misleading, IMO. We found that the Ford has little downhill breaking, sluggish start off the line, no decent manual mode, and much noiser. Our 08 Rogue is much more friendly, quieter (yes it's a smaller engine), more flexible, much more fun (with the paddles and seven speeds). How is headroom in the Rogue? with/without sunroof? No problem here, but we're only 5'10". I compared both with and w/o sunroofs during test drives and didn't notice any blatant difference. |
|
|
Replying to: pitkeys (Jun 10, 2008 8:43 am) Yeah, if you consider an additional 2,000 pounds a "bit"  The Rogues 1,500 pound tow rating rules out all but the tiniest campers...even my smallish pop-up camper is nearly 1,400 pounds empty.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
SUVs Nissan Rogue Nissan Rogue vs Honda CR-V vs Toyota RAV4
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Nissan Rogue
2010 Honda CR-V
2011 Toyota RAV4
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
