Ask the Car People.SM


Tiguan vs. Forester vs. CR-V

115 messages,  Last post on Dec 01, 2011 at 4:11 PM

You are in the Volkswagen Tiguan Forum.

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

Messages Page 4 of 12

#29 of 115 I went with Old Reliable by kr5

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 by kr5

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] by carlitos7

Nov 12, 2009 (12:08 pm)

Replying to: blueiedgod (Nov 02, 2009 11:28 am)
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.

#32 of 115 Last word by motoguy128

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.

#33 of 115 Performance by motoguy128

Nov 13, 2009 (2:16 pm)

You cant fairly compare performance when one vehcile gets 18/24mpg and the other gets 21/27 (comparing 2010 AWD models). The 2 just don't compare directly because one is designed as an practicle compact CUV. The other is designed more for performance.
 
The difference in cargo room and rear seat room is a pretty wide gap. It's like comparing a Civic Si to an Accord 4cyl and complaining that the Accord is too slow. They simply have different design goals.

#34 of 115 Re: Tiguan vs. Forester vs. CV-R [carlitos7] by blueiedgod

Nov 16, 2009 (11:11 am)

Replying to: carlitos7 (Nov 12, 2009 12:08 pm)
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...
 
Actually, I listed all the OPTIONAL features, but Edmunds limits the length of posts. But, if you add the OPTIONAL features that you boast about, it adds another $5000 to the already inflated price of Jetta with high clearance. Now, we have a $10,000 gap between the vehicles in comparison.
 
Is $10,000 worth the 20 HP boost in power? NO!!!!
Is $10,000 worth the electric folding mirrors? NO!!!!
Is $10,000 worth the panoramic sunroof? NOOO!!!! I barely use mine, why would I want two sunroovs? And how often do you lay on your back in the car to enjoy the sunroof, let alone 2 of them (one is fixed anyway)?
Is $10,000 worth the PERCIEVED luxury factor? Not in my book!!!!
 
What the $10,000 more will buy you is more often visits to the dealership during the warranty, and more frequent out of pocket repairs.
 
Besides, if I wanted to, I can add eletric folding mirrors to my CR-V for about $100 in parts. That is the beauty of standardized global platform. I wanted heated mirrors, which were not available on the EX, so, I just bought replacement glass from the SE, and plugged them in. Took me less than an hour to add a feature I wanted, without having to pay for the features I did not care about.
 
You may call me racist, or liar, but the fact remains, country of assembly AFFECTS the quality of the product.
 
The work ethics vary from culture to culture, and that is a FACT! Work ethic in Japan is different than US, which is different than in Mexico, which is different from Germany. No matter how much you candy coat the subject to be politically correct, the fact still remains.
 
Given the choices, I will buy a product made in the USA or Japan, over same product made in Mexico, China. Call me racist, but it is my money, and I want a product that will not fail on me.

#35 of 115 Re: Tiguan vs. Forester vs. CV-R [blueiedgod] by godeacs

Nov 16, 2009 (9:53 pm)

Replying to: blueiedgod (Nov 16, 2009 11:11 am)
You are not alone! I live in Texas and I wouldn't trust anything made/assembled "south of the border".....

#36 of 115 Top Safety Pick Award by vbbuilt

Nov 18, 2009 (8:53 am)

Not trying to pick on the CR-V, but here's a goody: "Nineteen cars and 8 SUVs earn the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's Top Safety Pick award for 2010 For the first time, good performance in a roof strength test to measure protection in a rollover is required to win. " The 2010 Tiguan and Forester are in this group, but CR-V is NOT !!! So, seems CR-V may get top marks in quality, etc, but you're risking your life, if you buy one.
 
So if better gas milage is important, pick the CR-V; if you really want off-road capability, pick the CR-V; if you want more storage space, pick the CR-V; and if you want more horsepower and a more faster engine, more torque, pick the CR-V. But if you want a really safe vehicle, that protects your loved ones, go with an alternative.
 
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.
 
http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr111809.html
 
Vince.

#37 of 115 Re: Top Safety Pick Award [vbbuilt] by motoguy128

Nov 18, 2009 (9:54 am)

Replying to: vbbuilt (Nov 18, 2009 8:53 am)
To say your "risking your life" is a little extreme and misguided. Its' like saying that all Qb's in the NFL that can't run the 40 under a certian time are worthless. No, because quickness is only 1 aspect to their performance and not the most critical.
 
The reason the CR-V was not awarded top safety pick was because of a new test added this year involving a roof strength test. Its' a static test, not a dynamic real world test. The SUV's that passed were more "blocky" or smaller, making the strength of the roof proportionally stronger. In most all roll-overs however, the vehicle does not land squarely on the roof or with a force greater than it's weight. I challenge to validity of the test in terms of it's relevance ot real world crashes. If there was data that showed that occupants of CR-V suffered a greater frequency of injuries, then I would support the test. I do not believe there is any data to support that.
 
I suspect those hat did well in th tests did so out of luck or because of a more "boxy" design, not because they intentionally designed the vehcile with this test in mind.
 
It's possible that you could design a vehcile that passes this test, but add less desirable traits such as blindspots and a higher center of gravity, making an accident more likely.
 
Does Honda need to adress this? I think so. On the next redesign, I suspect they will incorporate additional roof supports or a modified design.
 
SO are the Tiguan and Forester safer... yes... if you are in a rollover accident in which the vehcile becomes airborne and lands with most all of it's weight on the roof. This is probably the lowest percentage type of collison there is and is the liekly the least likely cause of death or injury to occupants. Howeve,r it was likely pursued, because it's the last area of vehcile desing that has not been specifically addressed. I think they shoud have announced thsi new test 304 years in advance and given MFG's an opportunity ot chance their designs rathe than spirng it on the industry so that only by sheer luck 2 of a dozen vehciels pass.

#38 of 115 Re: Top Safety Pick Award [vbbuilt] by blueiedgod

Nov 18, 2009 (11:15 am)

Replying to: vbbuilt (Nov 18, 2009 8:53 am)
I agree with motoguy and it is shown in the data.
 
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.

Messages Page 4 of 12

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