RAV-4, CR-V. FORRESTER, or something else
- Thread starter Jerryb
- Start date
- Status
The Forester has the best engine.
I've owned a 2003 CR-V, so, I cannot answer for the newer CR-V. However, I sold it for a 2006 Forester. The Forester has a nicer ride, more acceleration, easier to get things in and out of, and handles better. I hear people say the new RAV-4 is much improved, but, I've never ridden in one. They're all nice, you'll just have to drive each one, do the math, and you'll end up with a decent vehicle.
If you want a little longer wheelbase and a bit better ride quality, a Legacy-type Wagon has a decent amount of room...stick with the normally aspirated version if you are concerned about fuel mileage. The 175 hp moves the car along very nicely, and you'll be able to get over 30 mpg on the highway at 70 mph with the A/C running. My other Subaru, an '07 Legacy Sedan, gets the low 30's if I stay under 75 mph.
If you want a little longer wheelbase and a bit better ride quality, a Legacy-type Wagon has a decent amount of room...stick with the normally aspirated version if you are concerned about fuel mileage. The 175 hp moves the car along very nicely, and you'll be able to get over 30 mpg on the highway at 70 mph with the A/C running. My other Subaru, an '07 Legacy Sedan, gets the low 30's if I stay under 75 mph.
Me and my wife recently test drove all of those and a few more including the Saturn Vue, Ford Escape, Mazda Tribute, and a Mazda 5.
As for the ones you listed, our thoughts were this:
CRV - Good point was it was a honda. Other than that, we didnt care for the interior at all. My wife's father has a CRV and while he likes it, he wouldnt buy one again. For the price, there just wasnt enough "bang."
Rav4 - they seemed ok. Kind of small and felt kind of whimpy. Kinda like driving a corolla or yaris. Once again, too much $$ not nearly enough bang for the buck. Also, my wife's brother had a Rav4 and said there were problems that many people were having with them. I think a transmission problem was one. He wasnt saying they were all bad, but he and a friend of his weren't having good luck. That also pushed us away.
Forrester - This was our 2nd or third favorite. The good points are its engine and drivetrain. 172+hp and still gets 28+mpg WITH AWD. Very fun to drive. The only knock was rear seat leg room and lack of basic options. So once again, no bang for the buck.
Saturn Vue - Very nice interior. A soft ride, if you like that, which we didnt. Not very peppy compared to other SUVs. It does come with a lot of standard features, just not the ones we liked/needed. Saturn dealers around here don't negotiate price so again, no bang for the buck.
Mazda Tribute. Loved everything about it except the dash and interest rate.
Ford Escape - This was really no contest for us. This little suv brings a whole lot more to the table for the $$. It was the most fun to drive. A nice, not soft, firm ride with great feedback through the wheel. The drivetrain doesnt provide as much power as subaru. The interior was very "us." Lots of leg room. If you can drive a MTX, these little guys regularly see 30+mpg. Then, you throw in the 0% APR for 66months and it was an absolute slam dunk for us. We were also able to get more safety features for less $$ than the competitors.
Again, everyone's taste is not the same. All of the little SUVs have their good points. I'm not trying to sway your decision, just trying to share info.
Good luck and test drive them all!!!
As for the ones you listed, our thoughts were this:
CRV - Good point was it was a honda. Other than that, we didnt care for the interior at all. My wife's father has a CRV and while he likes it, he wouldnt buy one again. For the price, there just wasnt enough "bang."
Rav4 - they seemed ok. Kind of small and felt kind of whimpy. Kinda like driving a corolla or yaris. Once again, too much $$ not nearly enough bang for the buck. Also, my wife's brother had a Rav4 and said there were problems that many people were having with them. I think a transmission problem was one. He wasnt saying they were all bad, but he and a friend of his weren't having good luck. That also pushed us away.
Forrester - This was our 2nd or third favorite. The good points are its engine and drivetrain. 172+hp and still gets 28+mpg WITH AWD. Very fun to drive. The only knock was rear seat leg room and lack of basic options. So once again, no bang for the buck.
Saturn Vue - Very nice interior. A soft ride, if you like that, which we didnt. Not very peppy compared to other SUVs. It does come with a lot of standard features, just not the ones we liked/needed. Saturn dealers around here don't negotiate price so again, no bang for the buck.
Mazda Tribute. Loved everything about it except the dash and interest rate.
Ford Escape - This was really no contest for us. This little suv brings a whole lot more to the table for the $$. It was the most fun to drive. A nice, not soft, firm ride with great feedback through the wheel. The drivetrain doesnt provide as much power as subaru. The interior was very "us." Lots of leg room. If you can drive a MTX, these little guys regularly see 30+mpg. Then, you throw in the 0% APR for 66months and it was an absolute slam dunk for us. We were also able to get more safety features for less $$ than the competitors.
Again, everyone's taste is not the same. All of the little SUVs have their good points. I'm not trying to sway your decision, just trying to share info.
Good luck and test drive them all!!!
I like the Forester in Urban Grey Metallic with Premium package. I have been putting off buying one for over a year now.
Don't get me wrong, the Honda is nice too, but kinda "bubbly" looking to me.
Don't get me wrong, the Honda is nice too, but kinda "bubbly" looking to me.
If you are considering a Legacy GT wagon, do it quickly. Supposed to be dropped soon. Will still make the Outback. I have a 5 speed 2005 GT wagon. Last year with the manual tranny. These cars are VERY quick and get decent milage (I've averaged around 25), if you keep the revs down. The turbo produces a lot of boost and from 3500 rpm or so, is really starting to make some power. You can get turbo in Forester, too, but not as much power. I don't guess the youth have found these cars (or want to) 'cause insurance is still pretty reasonable. Sort of a stealth WRX for old guys (and gals). Car still has pretty good ground clearance but not as much as Outback and Forester. Handling is quite a bit better than Forester I used to own and braking is far superior. You can get some deals on these as Outback more popular.
Wait for the new Highlander before deciding (or get a deal on the last year of the current one). Quite ugly, but what cute-ute isn't? Speaking of ugly, maybe you should drive the RDX and X3 for points of reference.
Can't say a thing about the CR-V as I've never owned one . But I've had a '99 legacy outback,02 Forrester,05 CRD ,and now an 07 Rav-4 . The Subarus were faultless (one of the fog light bulbs failed ) , the CRD was a dissapointment as far as reliablity, so we got the RAV-4 . All of these vehicles have been for My wife. She drives an average of 100 miles per day in all weather ,and at varying times . Of all the previously named vehicles , She's most impressed with the Rav-4 ( bear in mind it's new ,and a Limited
) But it does seem to get better fuel mileage than either of the Subarus ,or the CRD . Hopefully it will rival the reliability of those two Subaru's.... Time will tell . John
Drive them! When I looked at vehicles with a friend a few months ago we looked at those three. We didn't even drive the RAV4 because the interior seemed cheap and uncomfortable. The CR-V is a spacious and comfortable ride. It's not a driver's vehicle, but it is nice. She ended up buying the Forester Columbia Edition (a Canada-only model, as far as I know).
The CR-V and RAV4 give you stability control because the manufacturers are afraid you might roll them. The Forester has far more inherent stability and doesn't need it. You'll notice right away on a test drive how much more car-like the Forester is.
The CR-V and RAV4 give you stability control because the manufacturers are afraid you might roll them. The Forester has far more inherent stability and doesn't need it. You'll notice right away on a test drive how much more car-like the Forester is.
Another option is the new Jeep Patriot.
Looks a lot like an updated Cherokee. 172 or so HP engine. I drove one, but didn't like the CVT, have to try a 5 speed.
They're pretty inexpensive, and nothing fancy inside.
Looks a lot like an updated Cherokee. 172 or so HP engine. I drove one, but didn't like the CVT, have to try a 5 speed.
They're pretty inexpensive, and nothing fancy inside.
We have a 9 year old CRV and it looks and drives like new. everything works 100% at 117k.
The Forester really does have better "accident avoidance" behavior...probably at least partly due to the lower center of gravity of that flat 4 engine. I think it's handling is unparalleled in the small SUV-type vehicles. Still, the Legacy wagon would not only ride better, but, it handles better. It just depends upon what you like the most.
We have three four door sedans in the family, two fords and a Volvo. A small SUV would be handy at the hardware store and 4 wheel drive would be nice in bad weather. No more fords or Chryslers. I think I'll go with a friend and drive those 3 SUVs. New cars are like women at closing time;they all look good. An impartial friend can point out some of the shortcomings of each car. Thanks for all your help.
No flames but have you considered an Element?
The RAV4 V6 is rated for 20/28 by the EPA, which is within 2 mpg of the four-cylinder RAV4 or CRV. Aside from the initial $1500 premium, there's little reason to purchase the four over the six.
If you are insistent upon getting a four-cylinder, get a CRV EX. It has a 5-speed automatic versus a Toyota 4-speed. Otherwise, the RAV4 V6 is my recommendation.
If you are insistent upon getting a four-cylinder, get a CRV EX. It has a 5-speed automatic versus a Toyota 4-speed. Otherwise, the RAV4 V6 is my recommendation.
have a crv and love it.
honda includes a fold out card table in the boot on the crv.
honda includes a fold out card table in the boot on the crv.
I've always thought that table was silly. Never used it when I had a CR-V! We always seemed to play cards inside the house...
I almost bought the Element, but I drive too fast.
I had an Element, too. It was PERFECT for triathlons that I was doing all the time. Bike could be set up for the race the night before, and just roll it to the bike rack, ready to go. Easy to change clothes in, easy to clean. Relatively economical. However, my job changed, I had knee surgery, and I no longer have it since it doesn't fit my requirements as well as my current vehicle.
- Status
Similar threads
