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 Volkswagen Tiguan Tiguan vs. Forester vs. CR-V
47 messages, Last post on Nov 23, 2009 at 10:01 AM
You are in the Volkswagen Tiguan Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: vbbuilt (Nov 18, 2009 7:53 am) Honda Element, which is the same as CR-V, but with more boxed designed passed the new test. And Mr. CR-V, if you really want to trash me and carlitos for our pinions, then go ahead. I've already made my choice and absolutely love it! The CR-V just doesn't measure up where it REALLY matters. I only trash blatant lies and exaggerations. You provided test results to support your claims.  However, I do wonder.... You bought the Tiguan on October 22nd, yet the IHHS report was not released until November 18th. Unless you are able to predict the future, there is no way that you could have assessed that the Tiguan's A, B, and C pillars are able to withstand the 3.25x of its own weight versus the CR-V's 2.5X its own weight. So, did you really base your choice on the have yet to be released safety report? Let's be honest.... You are just trying to justify spending $10,000 more for the same econobox station wagon.  If you do have the ability to see into the future, I would like your top 10 stock picks, and lottery winning numbers for the next powerball. Thank you. |
|
|
First of all, according to iihs website, the model tested was the 2009 Tiguan. In the small SUV class, the Tiguan is top of the list and received "Good" in rollover test with a strength to weight ratio of 5.82 at a curb weight of 3665 lbs. The Element also did well, 2003 - 2010 models, received "Good" in rollover test with a strength to weight ratio of 4.31 at a curb weight of 3633 lbs. Notice the similarity in curb weight but substantial difference in roof strength. Now, for the CR-V, 2007-2010 models. It received a "Marginal" score, with a strength to weight ratio of 2.80 at a curb weight of 3469 lbs. All 3 are pretty close in weight but the important number, strength to weight, is the important number here. Yikes! You just stated that the CR-V is the same as the Element, yet look at the numbers. The strength to weight ratio of 2.80 is pretty sad. How can you compare the Element to CR-V in that arena? And you're trying to tell us that the CR-V is prefereable to the Tiguan? Let's see, I, "joe-consumer" will choose a vehicle which only measures Marginal as opposed to a vehicle that scores "good"? What are you smoking? Yes, the Tiguan is more expensive, but I'm willing to spend more money for a more substantially safe vehicle. And oh by the way, let's put both vehicles in a parking lot and have a panel of experts compare side-by-side, to see which is constructed better. Fit, materials, workmanship, features, specs, performance, and safety. What's your next argument? Vince.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't see how a STW of 2.8 is sad. It exceeds the federal requirements of 1.5 by almost 2 times. IIHS looks at statistics and found that a magic number of 4.0 could possibly reduced injury rates. So they decided that was the number to use. An acceptable mark is 3.25, which the CR-V was very close to. Don't get me wrong, the Tiguan according the IIHS stest, is very well designed. It's a great platform, I like VW's. But like the Rogue, it was too small. And ultimately too expensive for comparable trim levels and features. The very good engine and chassis carried at $5000 premium. With that price and level of fuel economy, I'll start shopping much a more capable Murano or a Higlander. You can't really compare the 2 fairly side by side because the Tiguan, based on it's size and interior dimensions should be less expensive. But it comes with a chassi and engine more comparable ot vehcile 1 class above. So for it's price, I would expect better interior materials and fit & finish. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: vbbuilt (Nov 18, 2009 11:03 am) Maybe it is so top heavy is that it is more prone to roll over than the CR-V and hence VW had to put a stronger roof on it? We all know what happened when "Joe-Consumer" was after safer and safer vehicle... we had the SUV wars of the late 90's and early 2000's, with the gargantuan SUV's clogging the roadways. So, if you were really after the safest vehicle for your self and your family, you would have bought an 80,000 lbs Greyhound bus. Because there should be no limit to guarantee the safety... In liu of Greyhound bus, may I suggest a Mack truck, or a Bradley Assault vehicle? The last one comes with armor to protect against rogue shopping carts at the mall. Stop trying to convince your self as to why you paid $10,000 more. You had no clue that Tiguan had strogner roof than the CR-V when you bought it. The report was not out, yet! And, yes, CR-V and the Element are the same car in different skin. The vertical design of the same pillars is what yielded higher roof strength for the Element than the CR-V. I also wonder if the vertical forces in the roll over collision ever exceed the 2x the vehicle weight. Is there any data on that? The excessive roof strength would only matter if something was dropped on it, like a piano falling from the 20th floor, or a bridge falling on the car. As to the experts making descisions, I think they have spoken when they compared the vehicles in any Small SUV comparo. Tiguan, not matter how nice it may be, does not justify what VW charges for it. |
|
|
Replying to: blueiedgod (Nov 19, 2009 10:06 am) The purpose of this thread is to contrast 3 vehicles, to give people who haven't purchased a vehicle, a chance to make an informed decision, but they have a hard time doing so, because the arguing and sniping in this thread seems to have transformed this thread into the personal background for owners. I'm not going to argue anymore, because it isn't in anyone's best interests. You've purchased the Honda and don't have to justify your decision. I've bought the Tiguan and I'm happy with it. Both vehicles are impressive, both have strengths and both have weaknesses. If you want to say the CR-V is superior, I'll grant you that some aspect the CR-V shines, but the Tiguan shines as well. Peace!  Vince.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: carlitos7 (Oct 26, 2009 11:22 am) yes some men find the need to keep their hands on the stick, maybe that gives them the feeling of being "Big", as for me, i know i am and do not feel the need to prove it, and who knows maybe im a woman? so besides the sexist bitter flavor of you comment, it fails to deliver any comedic value. Nor does yours. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: vbbuilt (Nov 20, 2009 5:21 am) Agreed; if only VW could go consistently without long-term reliability problems (3-5 years and beyond), I'd put them on my short list of makes I'd love to own. They're more exciting than the Honda lineup, but I don't have enough disposable income to sleep at night with one in my garage. The Tiguan's back seat strikes me as very small (I'm 6'5" and pay special attention to legroom); I can sit in the back of a CR-V or a Santa-Fe just fine. I'm not sure I could in a Tiguan. Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
That's what I noticed most. In terms space and utility it was not much better than a compact hatchback. Keep in mind that if you were to slide the CR-V's rear seat forward to have the same rear legroom as the Tiguan, the rear cargo area would expand by another 3 or 4 cu-ft. This weekend I hauled a 8 foot long area rug we pick-up at Lowes down the center of the CR-V and still had plenty of room for 3 passengers and a car seat. We then loaded up the cargo area with christmas gifts and still had room for a large stroller... and I could still see out the back window. With a Tiguan or Rogue, I wouldn't be able to do so. Is it still a CUV if it lacks utility for many common tasks??? |
|
|
Replying to: thegraduate (Nov 23, 2009 8:20 am) I agree with you about the reliability issue. I've never considered VW, until now, because of relibility track record. But the Tiguan may change that. The Tiguan is a big unknown, but Consumer Reports, from what data they've collected to date, seems to think reliability may be favorable. Time will tell. The fact that they given it their "check mark" is a plus for me. As for the cost issue, Consumer Reports states "The Tiguan straddles the line between the less-expensive Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV4 and upscale models like the Acura RDX among small SUVs", I found this to be true and it fits my pocketbook. Overall, I think the Tiguan is a little more "plush" than the CR-V, but that's just me. Vince. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: vbbuilt (Nov 20, 2009 5:21 am) I am sorry, I confused you with Carlitos. He had the bluetooth GPS, panoramic sunroof and some other options which added to $5000 over sticker, which was $5000 more than the CR-V to begin with. |
|
You are here:
Forums
SUVs Volkswagen Tiguan Tiguan vs. Forester vs. CR-V
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Volkswagen Tiguan
2010 Subaru Forester
2010 Honda CR-V
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
