Last post on Dec 01, 2011 at 4:11 PM
You are in the Volkswagen Tiguan
What is this discussion about?
Volkswagen Tiguan, Subaru Forester, Honda CR-V, Car Comparisons, SUV
#23 of 115 Re: Tiguan vs. Forester vs. CV-R [kr5]
Nov 03, 2009 (8:06 pm)
I have been a loyal Acura customer since 1992, with the exception of one bmw. I've had 7 acura/honda products. My acura was a 2006 acura tsx/nav. I must say, I have only positive things to say about my tsx experience. However, with a new 11 week old baby and the need for some more space I spent about 3 months researching and test driving every SUV/CUV. Reading reviews and watching youtube until my eyes were bleeding. I narrowed my choices down to Acura RDX, Lexus RX350,Nissan Murano, Audi Q5, Subaru Forester, VW Tiquan, BMW X3, Volvo XC60 and even ventured on the dark side looking at Ford Escape and GM Equinox. Since I had navigation on the TSX, this had to be part of the deal. I test drove every vehicle (some a few times). I'm fortunate to have many friends in the car business that let me steal keys from the dealerships and really drive these vehicles. Keep in mind I live in Toronto where we are no strangers to a lot of snow from Dec-March.
I wanted something fun to drive, reasonable on gas, room for 4 and a baby stroller in the back and awd. So, here's an acura-aholic take.
Acura RDX - Wonderwoman lost her shield and put it on the RDX. Quality truck, fast, met a lot of my want list, but the styling and poor fuel economy left it at the dealer - you have no idea how hard it was to leave acura, but my god, that new TL is gawd awful looking. It may drive great, but no car should take long to get use to.
BMW X3 - ummmm 55k plus tax. I was born at night, but not last night! Nice truck to drive, but lease was $950, without all the options I wanted. Enough said.
Audi Q5 - great truck and was first on my list. Nothing bad to say, except that the residual value was very low and leasing rates were terrible. Plus add navigation, sline package and audi drive select and you back at 55k. Sorry, 62 grand with tax. I'd rather walk. Base model in canada is 43k with no sunroof.
Nissan Murano - 48k. Boring to drive for me and styling was like a floating egg for me. I'm sure it's a good vehicle, but you just know something is not right after a test drive. I would not put my 800 bucks a month on the table.
VW tiquan - cute, good qaulity inside, heavy like a tank, no space in the back,so this was off the list. I think VW should have made it a bit larger and less bug looking. But, no doubt a good truck.
Ford escape, equinox - would rather walk after test driving. Dealership staff was terrible and I felt like I was in 1982. From acura to this, was too far of a dive off the cliff.
Lexus and Volvo - both polar opposites. Lexus rx350 was gorgeous. Like driving a quiet living room on the hwy. However, no road feel and felt very very soft. Great vehicle, just was not for me. Volvoxc60 had the worst navigation i've ever tried. Some weird toggle by the steering wheel. It was like every other volvo I've every test driven - bland drive with great seats. Heavy steering and my wife said it was like driving a tank (she's the boss...so, volvo was out).
Subaru forester - I read the motor trend review, ajac and thought I should look at this. I've never stepped foot in a subaru product ever. I drove out of the parking lot in a dark grey xt limited with navigation and multimedia pachage. I called my wife and said "this &*^*ing" subaru is good. I went home and read every criticism about and praise about the truck and went back for a second test drive. Ok 4 gears instead of 5? I can't tell. In fact, I never really knew. Fast as the RDX I drove and I thought seats were comfortable and great suspension, handling. I went around a few pot holes and said...I think this is the car for me. I sat on it for another week, drove the RDX again and went back to Subaru and leased a 2010 Subaru forester XT with nav/multimedia. Absolutely freakishly great ride, fast and takes the corners and bumps very well. I leased this truck at 800 bucks above cost for 575 tax in with 1500 due at signing and I am loving this truck. I test drove a wrx sti and will get one of these in the summer. Service was excellent and I can't believe how great this drives. 4 speed automatic drives amazing and to me, the dash is very tightly finished and personally, this navigation is 10x better than my tsx had.
For those that want a fun truck, with the best overall ride and amazing awd - I would not hesitate.
new to the subaru family and I think I will be here for a very long time!
#24 of 115 Re: Tiguan v. Forester [BCWatty_]
Nov 04, 2009 (8:10 pm)
Driving experience? You found the Tiquan more fun to drive than a Forester XT? That's interesting. Your experience is your experience and if you like the Tiguan, enjoy...it is a nice truck. However, for me it was the amazing power, great steering feel, navigation system and the much larger space that made the Forester a clear winner for my taste.
#25 of 115 My New 2010 Tiguan SEL
Nov 05, 2009 (6:21 am)
I'm going to tell you my story. Some of you may remember me when I had the 2007 Mazda CX-7 and was a regular contributor to that forum on Edmunds. Sadly, I was involved in a nasty accident about 3 weeks ago. The CX-7 was totalled and I only had a very minor neck injury (strained muscle, pull). Up until then, I still very much enjoyed that ride, loved it, in fact and now wistfully remember what it was. When compared to other cars in it's day, it had strengths and weaknesses, but I still loved it!
Anyway, had to go shopping. I've always relied on Consumer Reports to guide me. CR is usually quite accurate in their assessments. But I also read Road & Track, Car & Driver and Motortrend, for their views. I'm 6'4", so fit is crucial. Form, fit, value and good looks guide me, just as it does for many of you. Initially, I concentrated on Honda, Toyota, Nissan. I've never cared for Subaru - just didn't like it's looks. I've had Subaru before, but the last time I had one, it was a disaster on 4 wheels - left a permanent bad taste in my mouth.
Up until recently, I never considered VW. VW reputation in terms of reliability, as reported by CR, has been dismal, until recently...The Tiguan is apparently starting to garner notice at CR and for the first time, elevated it to the "recommended" status. "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. Based on the Golf and Passat, the Tiguan did well in our tests. It is quiet, offers a roomy rear seat, and has excellent fit and finish. Handling is agile and secure, and the ride is comfortable" The only downs that CR noted was "premium fuel, price". But the SEL, fully loaded was still quite competitive in terms of cost. I got a really good deal from the dealer and the 3 years of no-cost maintenance, is icing on the cake.
Well, Tiguan started looking pretty good to me. Went to the VW website, since I knew nothing about it. Starting to look better. Finally went to test drive it. I got hooked. Now, keep in mind I test drove the Rav-4, CRV, Santa Fe and oh yeah, Outback and Forrester. Yawn! The Tiguan is luxurious on the inside, to me, it smart-looking and offered features that are found in higher priced models, that none of the others offered.
It's got plenty of punch for me (hell, if any of you drove the CX-7, you know all about that!). In fact, when I tromped on the accelerator, I had to hold on for dear life! Caught me off-guard! Very nimble. I absolutely love the panoramic moon roof! Sweet!
CR says the RAV4 accelerates faster. Ok, good for it! I don't race cars, so who cares? Toyota, Honda, Subaru, Nissan, Hyundai all make quality products. I've owned all at one time or another! I can't agree more, but as of today, IMHO, the Tiguan goes one better.
#26 of 115 Re: My New 2010 Tiguan SEL [vbbuilt]
Nov 05, 2009 (11:18 am)
hey thanks for your timely post. sorry to hear about your CX7 though.
we are coming out of a 2007 CX7 lease, and want to go for something different. i did stop by the Mazda dealer and check out the new CX7, but the navigation (which we feel is now a crutch rather than a luxury as it was 3 yrs ago) now is a small 3" screen way up in the dash. i like the engine, plenty of acceleration for us non-racers, but why not play the field. it is a deal though.
right now i am between the Tiguan and want to still test drive the Outback (its looks don't bother me at all). what i can't justify is the Tiguan SEL price tag. i like the sunroof (we had a Mini and loved its sunroof, we never opened the CX7 sunroof), and wish we could do the leather- although the cloth looks/feels nicer than most. with the new sign then drive program i wonder what the leases will be like? the Tuguan cargo room does seem smaller, but passenger compartment seems decent.as for acceleration and handling, i did not get a good impression, since the dealer i went with took me out only on side roads
the CRV never interested me, as the engine was pretty dismal. i've also driven the Murano, and with the CVT the dealer compared it to the RX rather than the FX35, which is a monster of a SUV (one can dream....). Rogue- forget about it.
any other opinions on car options or Trim packages for the TIguan?
#27 of 115 Re: My New 2010 Tiguan SEL [cs2i]
Nov 05, 2009 (12:40 pm)
First thing I noticed is that the Tiguan has a lot more acceleration than the CX-7 and turbo lag is almost none existant. Tiguan is smaller than the 7 and has less cargo space. BUT...I was amazed at the interior passenger room between the 2. I'm tall, so a lot more headroom and legroom, front and rear.
As for the trim, I like my creature comforts, so opted for the SEL and the panoramic moon roof. Shop through the web and get quotes. I probably saved $2k just doing that and then I started haggling. Make the dealer fight for your wallet. Timing is good right now, since everyone knows the auto industry is struggling. It's a buyer's market right now. As far as choosing between the Tiguan and the Outback, go with your gut instinct. Price, features, availability, reliability. For me, if something catches my eye and it's one of those "I've got to have that!" then my wallet comes out. That's why I chose the CX-7 when it was first introduced 3 years ago. It's styling and features screamed "Buy me!"
Nov 06, 2009 (9:10 am)
The Tiguan cost $5000 more than a comparable CR-V. You do get a more powerful engine and more sophisticated transmission, but you give up fuel economy and reliablity and maintenance costs.
As for interior quality. I sat in a couple of Tiguans with cloth interior and was suprised that the poor quality of meterials in a $30k+ vehicle.
The CR-V is also mush roomier, has fewer blind spots and a much larger cargo area.
The CR-V doesn't pretend to be a perfomance SUV. It's a practicle, economical compact SUV with adequate power, lots of room a good ride and good fuel economy.
Just like all VW's the Tiguan is more of a niche vehcile. Don't get me wrong, I almost bought a Jetta TDI sportwagen but the nearest VW dealer is 100 miles away and VW's don;t have the best reputation or statistical data in terms of reliability.
#29 of 115 I went with Old Reliable
Nov 11, 2009 (2:40 pm)
Thanks to everyone who responded to my original post back in February asking for advice on choosing a Forester, CV-R or Tiguan. For some reason, Edmunds started to send me responses to my post only in the past few weeks.
Anyway, I'm most impressed with the technological saavy, not to mention the feisty attitude, of those of you who offered an opinion on the relative merits of these vehicles. I finally made a decision and bit the bullet in May and bought --- drum roll, please --- the Subaru Forester.
My take on this car was pretty much expressed by gdoc in his/her post, so I won't get into a lot of gushy detail here. Suffice it to say that the Forester's looks, performance and quality impressed me more than the CV-R's, and offered a bit more exclusivity than the CV-R, which seems to be the car of choice for young Moms everywhere (I'm a middle-aged guy) and looks a bit dated to me.
I owned a Honda Prelude years ago, and found this brand to be very trustworthy, so it was a pretty close call between the CV-R and the Forester. In fact, I nearly bought a CV-R in 2003, when I bought my first Forester. The new Forester just looks better to me. The CV-R looks like a rolling egg, and the Tiguan looks like a gym-going Rabbit. Purely subjective, I know.
The Tiguan's superb handling nearly turned my head, but I've been burned too much by VW (see my February post) to trust this brand any time in the near future. In any case, I'm not sure whether handling and performance trumps reliability and functionality in this type of vehicle. I mean, if sport car-like handling and high-tech performance are important, why not just buy a CC or Jetta or a Jetta wagon if you need the cargo space? The cost of the Tiguan exceeded the Forester (I bought a loaded 2.5X Limited with VDC) by over $5000, and the Tiguan requires premium fuel. For a CUV? Really? Case closed!
#30 of 115 Old Reliable
Nov 11, 2009 (2:45 pm)
Just noticed I wrote "CV-R" instead of "CR-V" throughout my post. I must have auto-dyslexia synsdrome. Have mercy, motorheads!
#31 of 115 Re: Tiguan vs. Forester vs. CV-R [blueiedgod]
Nov 12, 2009 (12:08 pm)
Yes you would, and yes they are cheap cars with cheap components made to be sold as a bargain last resort cars for people who's only concern is getting from A to B with 0 enjoyment or luxury factor.
VW market share is smaller than Honda's, thats true, and same goes for BMWs market share and same for Acura's market share and same for all luxury cars market shares, that doesn't prove nor disapprove anything. your market share logic is flawed by definition.
in simpler words : market share is NOT directly proportional to quality.
Nop ! besides the fact of being racist, i don't see how your comment is related to quality, VWs are not made in Mexico (new beetle and Jetta are the only 2 models made at a Mexico Plant), you have either been misinformed or are actively lying as a last resort to support your theory.
If you have been misinformed, then as i advised you before, you should watch TV commercial with a better critical eye and obviously shouldn't believe everything they tell you on TV, and in case you are actively making up stories and stating half facts, aka lying, then there is no point in keeping arguing with you because it is clear that you have no more material to bring to the table, and that is why you are getting creative on the subject.
and for your own information, there is (again) no proven study that relates a car birth place and its quality, claiming that car made in Ohio is better than a car made in southern California is ridiculous.
i don't think there is a need to discuss the "dog poop" theory of yours because it is... well.. stinky.
the last thing is the feature by feature comparison of the CR-V vs Tiguan, you somehow jumped all the features that are on Tiguan and nowhere to be found on any CR-V model (like auto folding mirrors and panoramic roof), that is actually kind of pathetic, but i believe it makes you feel more comfortable. furthermore, that doesn't show the cheap make of the CR-V, you have to get into one to experience the plastic-ish and fake like leather design, the stupidly weak engine and the noisy ride...
as for myself, i never claimed, said or communicated that i was or i am an expert of any kind, but i believe that you let your imagination loose again and assumed that, the same way as you assumed many wrong things related to this subject.
i suggest you assume less, post less and read more.
make your opinion based on real facts not based on half facts and banal commercials.
Nov 13, 2009 (2:10 pm)
Better mileage, more room, better interior materials in hte most popular mid trim levels and $5000 less.
These aren't opinons, they are facts.
I'm not saying that the Tiguan is a bad vehcile. I'm sure it's great on the road, but it's not nearly as good of a value for most buyers. For many, it's just too small.