C&D Small SUV Comparo

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: kkreit01
Grand Vitara and Liberty would be the last pics by every magazine, and nearly every consumer....


Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
There's a bunch of them around here too because of the proximity of the Suzuki / used car "superstore."



It's all those GM Theta chassis components in the Suzuki Grand Vitara.

 

[fdcg27]

Guess they missed the Subaru Forester.
Better AWD system than any of the lot they tested, or rather looked at and drove like teenage kids with the keys to dad's car.
C&D is nothing like the magazine it once was.
The only reason that I still subscribe is that it's so cheap I figure I might as well.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Re: V6 RAV4 being "silly".

The reason I got one was it can seat 7 and tow 3500 lbs. Yet it's small and fuel efficient (relatively speaking, gulps gas 3x faster in city driving compared to my prius).


My saab is also rated for 3500 lb towing in a sedan... And its because the rav4 is a sedan a heart - or vice versa... What is the chassis basis?

The rav 4 is far smaller than a highlander, which also sits 7, but very tightly - I cant see the rav doing it for anything greater than very small children, which due to car seat laws, wouldnt fit. It may pull 3500, but its small chassis IMO does not make it very smart/safe, even if it has enough torque.

I get what youre saying... but Im just not seeing any of that stuff good for any practical use.

Maybe Im wrong, but Im just not seeing a good basis for it personally...

 

[Spazdog]

It used to be a Corolla chassis....I don't know what it's based off now. It may be it's own vehicle.

As far as what it "is good for"? How many people have a Tahoe or Expedition 2WD with one or two kids? It never tows anything and doesn't carry anything that I can't carry in my Mazda6's hatch. Some people feel that they "need" a more powerful SUV.

 

[JHZR2]

Well I have to think that this isnt quite the case for all. Getting ready for parenthood, looking at the amount of volume that a proper safety seat and stroller, let alone anything else that you need to travel with even a tiny infant, I can see why people want the far bigger car. Once they are self-portable, I totally agree though.

Power is another story...

 

[Spazdog]

hehehe....When my son was born we had an Integra GS-R and an Eclipse GT.

Stashing the stroller, diaper bag, and the other 20 odd things we seemed to need into a hatchback is easy. Getting an infant in and out of the backseat of a two-door is another thing entirely.

We started late. We are on average 10-15 years older than the other parents with kids his age at his school. Our backs needed 5-door cars. That's one of the many reasons we got the cars below.

 

[IndyIan]

Originally Posted By: Miller88
Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
There's a bunch of them around here too because of the proximity of the Suzuki / used car "superstore."

I know the SUVs in the comparison are far more refined, but they are also just bloated cars. They will sell well, but if I'm going to buy an SUV I want it to have a low range.


For me, it depends on how I'm going to use it. If I bought one of these SUVs, it would 100% be the front drive version. It would be my daily driver. I have never had a problem in the snow with FWD and snow tires.

If I need to off road or do anything serious, I have my Cherokee with solid axles, 5000 pound towing capacity and 4LO.

We ended with the Tracker as we needed some off-road and snow capability, but also get decent mileage. Our favorite icefishing lakes are 75 miles one way and then a few miles of forest access road/snowmobile trail. 15mpg would make it an expensive day for a few trout with our gas prices and the low range is needed with the manual trans.
I guess the Jeep Compass would now be the logical replacement with a low range and good gas mileage but it wasn't in the comparison and wouldn't receive any credit for its drive system anyways.

 

[oilmaven]

The RAV4 in it's current iteration has been around since 2006. The only change of note was an increase in the displacement of the 4 cyl. from 2.3L to 2.5L a couple of years ago. To it's credit, it has always rated highly in the comparos and owners seem to love the V6 power and good fuel economy. An all-new RAV4 will be introduced for the 2014 model year...rumor has it the engine offerings will be limited to 4 cylinders with no V6 option in the interest of fuel economy.

 

[SteveSRT8]

An enthusiast oriented rag will always pick the most athletic chassis design and will be heavily influenced by power output and performance. Duh.

That they excluded the Subie and others is simply a reflection of previous tests. This segment is most specifically NOT based on off road performance! These are "cute utes" that rarely get taken off the pavement by most owners.

The fact that C&D picked the Mazda shows that there actually was some subjectivity in the ratings, not just horsepower. It reinforces my opinion of them, as they remain the most enthusiast oriented and responsible car rag out there.

I love the trend toward smaller SUV's. The giant bloated whales in the SUV segment remain the most wasteful vehicles sold to the general public.

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8

I love the trend toward smaller SUV's. The giant bloated whales in the SUV segment remain the most wasteful vehicles sold to the general public.


I'm all for small SUVs, but hate that they are losing so much off road capability all because people refuse to be seen in a station wagon.

 

[97tbird]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
. The giant bloated whales in the SUV segment remain the most wasteful vehicles sold to the general public.


Moms whose only job is cranking out brats and can't even keep a car straight on the road love them

 

[supton]

Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8

I love the trend toward smaller SUV's. The giant bloated whales in the SUV segment remain the most wasteful vehicles sold to the general public.


I'm all for small SUVs, but hate that they are losing so much off road capability all because people refuse to be seen in a station wagon.


If I only had low range in my Jetta--preferably with its attendant ability to drive the rear wheels too--I wouldn't think of getting rid of my Jetta. Zero need for off-road capability here, and yet I live in the country. Sitting up higher would be nice for reversing the camper, though, and I suppose the extra ground clearance would be good for campgrounds--and NH paved-single track roads.

How many SUV's ever really go off-road anyhow? I sometimes wonder if my Jetta has seen more off-road action than some SUV's (class 6 roads and fields).

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8

I love the trend toward smaller SUV's. The giant bloated whales in the SUV segment remain the most wasteful vehicles sold to the general public.


I'm all for small SUVs, but hate that they are losing so much off road capability all because people refuse to be seen in a station wagon.


+1. It damages both segments.

 

[97tbird]

Why do Americans have such a huge hatchback-phobia, I wonder....

 

[sciphi]

My folks had wagons when I was growing up. My family managed to stuff 2 kids, 2 adults and a medium-size dog into whatever wagon we had throughout the years to go on vacations or the like. They were also handy to have around.

I'd rather have a long-roof car than a small SUV or minivan.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: sciphi
My folks had wagons when I was growing up. My family managed to stuff 2 kids, 2 adults and a medium-size dog into whatever wagon we had throughout the years to go on vacations or the like. They were also handy to have around.

I'd rather have a long-roof car than a small SUV or minivan.


I'd agree. So many have this fear of being old or not stylish in a wagon, yet won't be seen in a minivan, so drive these non-truck, car derived truck wannabe vehicles.

IMO station wagon, long and low roof type vehicles with minivan type sliding doors for practicality would be the best to me.

 

[sciphi]

We'll get back to the wagon eventually. My guess is that younger folks like me will wind up needing space for stuff, but not wanting the not-so-minivan or a gas guzzling SUV of any kind. 24-26 mpg combined for a small SUV is almost insultingly low fuel economy for the size vehicle it is. A Mazda3 hatchback is 30 mpg combined, as is a Honda Fit. Both of those cars have just as much or more people/cargo room, a fairly upright seating position, and much better fuel economy. They'll save $300-500 a year on fuel, based on fueleconomy.gov's assuming gas is $3.83/gallon and 15,000 miles per year at the combined fuel economy figure.

Add the inflated purchase price because it's a "truck", and a cute-ute is a financial disaster waiting for a "stylish" person to snap up as the current "hip" thing.

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2

So many have this fear of being old or not stylish in a wagon, yet won't be seen in a minivan, so drive these non-truck, car derived truck wannabe vehicles.

IMO station wagon, long and low roof type vehicles with minivan type sliding doors for practicality would be the best to me.


CUVs are overrated.

Cargo area with seats folded flat:
2013 Nissan Rogue: 57.9 cu.ft.
2005 Mazda6S five door: 58.7 cu.ft.

Guess which one handles better?

Just for fun, let's take out the rear seats on my other 5-door:

2005 PT Cruiser GT: 64.2 cu.ft.

It still probably outhandles a crossover. And if you are going to try to out run the PT, you had better buy the crossover with the BIG V6. You aren't going to do it with the QR25 in the Rogue or K24 in the CR-V. Not even close.

 

[JHZR2]

 

[jdeare]

There's a V6 Rav4 in my extended family. I've driven it a few times. It's legitimately fast, but other than that it's not all that great to drive. Specifically, I noticed that the seats are kind of weird... squishy and not very supportive, and kind of rough feeling fabric or whatever that is. Also, the steering wheel seems way too small. I had a very hard time getting comfortable in the thing and would not want to drive it for a long distance.

7 passengers only works with little kids. The very back seat definitely can't hold 2 adults.

As far as cargo capacity, it's kind of a weird size. The only advantage it has over my Mazda with the rear seats folded (it's a hatchback) that I can definitely notice is length.