Article Comments - 2009 VW Tiguan vs. 2008 Honda CR-V vs. 2008 Toyota RAV4

67 messages, Last post on Oct 20, 2009 at 4:33 AM

You are in the Honda CR-V Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester

What is this discussion about? Volkswagen Tiguan, Honda CR-V, Toyota RAV4, Car Comparisons, SUV

2009 Volkswagen Tiguan vs. 2008 Honda CR-V vs. 2008 Toyota RAV4 - So what's a utility-lovin' small family to do? Downsize. Full-size SUVs provide unmatched capability but their thirst may make you reassess your needs. Think compact utility vehicle. Think crossover. (more)

Outline

Messages Page 7 of 7: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; Prev; Next; Last

#59 of 67 Re: okay i guess [myphillyvw] by dieselbreath Nov 15, 2008 (10:05 am)
Replying to: myphillyvw (Sep 22, 2008 8:18 pm) "seems like the tiguan is the most fun to drive, has the nicest interior, and has more equipment but it loses because it's cost more??? isn't there a saying you get what you pay for? they didn't even mention the tiguans panoramic sunroof, dynaudio soundsytem, bi-xenon headlights with afs? i think it's a poor review IMO " Yeah, like "Let's make sure the VW loses based on price by adding features you can't even get in a Lexus!" The reviewer was too lazy to compare cars with the same features. If you load up a Toyota, you get a mid-range VW, but with less features and higher price. Hondas normally slot in between the other 2. When you factor in the greater accident survivability of a European vehicle, plus VW's higher re-sale (yes, VW beats even toyota on resale values) then the Tiguan is a no-brainer, but the reviewer also ignored those important features. Good information, but uneven comparison makes it lame overall. Replies to this message: guillegh (May 01, 2009 5:35 am)
#60 of 67 Re: awd comparison between rav4 and crv by d07 Nov 17, 2008 (11:32 am)
Replying to: kurtamaxxxguy (Nov 06, 2008 7:32 am) You can turn off the traction control as well in the CRV by disengaging the VSA. The CRV was not meant to do any serious off-roading to begin with. It was one of the original soft roaders. I have been in 1.5 feet of snow and on slippery iced hills and have never been stuck (so far - phew!) with my 08 CRV. I don't think the front wheels spun even half a revolution before the back took over and push on. A Honda technician tried to explain to me that the wheel that slips is held by that particular brake and then power is transmitted to any of the 3 wheels which still have available grip in varying ratios (front to back). In tough circumstances where the vehicles is bogged down and traction control applies brakes to prevent wheel spin, pressing on the VSA button for one second, disengages the Traction Control as well and then you can apply the correction required to engage the rear wheels. The most important factor in any off- roader is the tires though. With city slick tires, even a Hummer or Jeep would bog down in a little puddle of mud. its amazing how few people talk of that fact. With studded tires, even a mini with proper suspension would climb up a reasonable mud slide. Replies to this message: wwest (Nov 19, 2008 2:35 pm) d07 (Nov 19, 2008 7:21 pm)
#61 of 67 Re: awd comparison between rav4 and crv [d07] by wwest Nov 19, 2008 (2:35 pm)
Replying to: d07 (Nov 17, 2008 11:32 am) Tire studs will provide NO additional traction capability absent the ability to penetrate the loose surface and "bite" into the solid surface below, ice or whatever. Replies to this message: d07 (Nov 19, 2008 7:21 pm)
#62 of 67 Re: awd comparison between rav4 and crv [wwest] by d07 Nov 19, 2008 (7:21 pm)
Replying to: wwest (Nov 19, 2008 2:35 pm) Tire studs will easily shed any buildup between treads and offer equivalent grip as chains (if the studs are metal to begin with - like in some ice rally cars) on a road whose surface has some give. For an extremely hard surface with no give at all - you would need rocket thrusters/ vented airflow of some sort as wheels would be useless - as would skis (blades would be great for this). So what you say is right. Fortunately every type of prepared or unprepared road or travel surface that a vehicle is intended for use on unless coated with an extremely thick surface of ice with no give, is extremely rare and NO one would or should attempt to ride on such surfaces anyway - so that is a moot point. A puddle of mud constitutes a surface which has some give and so a studded tire would work a zillion times better than one meant for a drive in city conditions. Just my 2 cents.
#63 of 67 Re: okay i guess [dieselbreath] by guillegh May 01, 2009 (5:35 am)
Replying to: dieselbreath (Nov 15, 2008 10:05 am) Hellooo... Where has a VW (VW!) higher re-sale price? Please, do not say any comment like this... The % of 'less price' respect the new car's price is always higher in Toyota, even in Japan (of course, in proportion because japanese brands are cheaper in Japan (obvious)) You could compare the re-sale price between Lexus (almost specially made for US) and Audi. What happen with both cars after used? Please, you even shouldn't compare VW (my god, it's a VW) which use the same engine for SEAT as AUDI,... Specially when that brand sells in countries where the quality is not important (SouthAmerica, etc.); that's why in thouse countries the price is higher, because Toyota and other japanese brands keep their qualities) In Brazil, for example, where the "brand" is basically VW, they don't have any relation with VW in Europe, and that's why? Just because the adapt their products to the demand and no keeping the quality before anything (opposite to Toyota or Honda) Then, please, don't compare the VW with Toyota or Honda. I could say thousands of things about VW... (Audi (VW) telling they are the first brand using LEDs in front of cars...) or 4x4 on its cars... god... I can't anymore with that. That's pathetic. Always European brands telling 'they copy everything'... it's not the opposite? When you see the leven of problems even in Germany between german and japanese cars, let me know it, ok? The government in Germany makes a study about reliability and... look at the 20 first cars, please. (EVEN in Germany) On the other hand, the important is not simply the 'features' of the car, but if it's reliable or not and of course not just the appearance, like VW sells its cars. They probably look nice but... that's all. Have a nice car, sorry, a nice day day (from another european...) William
#64 of 67 Tiguan by carlitos7 Oct 19, 2009 (1:19 pm)
the Tiguan is a clear winner, no need even to compare in details… better looking, Turbo high performance engine yet low on consumption, and don’t forget the 6 speed Tiptronic automanual transmission, which, till very lately, only 100k plus sport cars used to have and which is now STANDARD in ALL VW cars ! but on the other hand, with the CR-V you get the “its gotta be reliable since it is a Honda” attitude with a cheap designed uncomfortable inside, a weak engine that cant even pull the heavy “mini van like” chassis of the CRV forward correctly and outdated features. if you’re fine with all that than it is the way to go it is clear that a featureless car has no features to worry about and thus, fewer trips to the garage Honda and Toyota Tactics: 1- wait till German and American car makers test a new feature for 5 years, include it as standard and claim ultimate reliability. 2-downsize the engine till its only enough to move the car and claim ultimate gas savings. 3-cut on all electronic features and claim ultimate cost reduction and less driver worries. its kind of funny actually, and whats funnier is that those tricks only work in the USA, they cant claim that even in Japan ! Replies to this message: richk6 (Oct 19, 2009 6:51 pm) thegraduate (Oct 19, 2009 6:57 pm) motoguy128 (Oct 20, 2009 4:33 am)
#65 of 67 Re: Tiguan [carlitos7] by richk6 Oct 19, 2009 (6:51 pm)
Replying to: carlitos7 (Oct 19, 2009 1:19 pm) Hmmm.. If German and American car makers test "new features for 5 years", why don't they have the reliability Honda and Toyota "claim". This is confirmed by Consumer Reports year after year. Look at the detailed reliability data from owners in the CR auto issue and notice all those black circles especially in VW models. The American car buying public aren't stupid. That's why the Honda CRV has been the best selling SUV in the country for 3 years running.
#66 of 67 Re: Tiguan [carlitos7] by thegraduate Oct 19, 2009 (6:57 pm)
Replying to: carlitos7 (Oct 19, 2009 1:19 pm) Downsize the engine? I drive as a courier, and put 2,000 miles a month on one of my two cars. It hits 60 in about ten seconds (slightly slower than the CR-V). I can tell you that never has it felt inadequate for getting up to speed on our 80 MPH beltway (I-459, Birmingham, Alabama), and it has over 200k miles on it! If you want to pay high-dollar maintenance on your turbo euro-motor, go for it - that's great, but to belittle those that don't need/desire a mommy-mobile to hit 60 in under 7 seconds is childish.
#67 of 67 Re: Tiguan [carlitos7] by motoguy128 Oct 20, 2009 (4:33 am)
Replying to: carlitos7 (Oct 19, 2009 1:19 pm) Have you even sat in a Tiguan??? I looked at one. With similar features, it cost about $3000-$5000 more than a CR-V or RAV4. The interior was pretty cheap, definitely not worth the $30k+ sticker price. The interior was identical to a Jetta or even a Rabbit/Golf. While it's price was more like a Passat. And the whole point of getting an SUV is cargo and passenger space... and it has a lot less room than the competition in both cargo and passenger space. So it has more power...big deal. I don't buy a compact SUV to win races. It also gets much lower mileage.... 18/24 with automatic. Yes it gets a little better with a manual transmission... but most folks don't want a manual. If I wanted a car that gets 18/24, I'd go get a Nissan Murano that's much roomier just as fast and alot more refined. So get it if you really need AWD, and high performance in a compact hatchback/SUV. Don't get it, if you want a highly versitle family vehicle that offers good value.