Rav4 vs Forester

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted by wemay
On looks and interior alone at least, I like the newest Rav4 more than the newest Forester.


We thought the RAV was pretty bad inside and out as compared to the Forester.
Your post illustrates the reason that both are on the market.
Personal tastes vary.
One man's meat is another man's poison as the old saying goes.

 

[wemay]

Originally Posted by fdcg27
Originally Posted by wemay
On looks and interior alone at least, I like the newest Rav4 more than the newest Forester.


We thought the RAV was pretty bad inside and out as compared to the Forester.
Your post illustrates the reason that both are on the market.
Personal tastes vary.
One man's meat is another man's poison as the old saying goes.


Not sure which model year Rav you were viewing. I agree that prior to the '19, it wasn't my taste either. If you look up a recent thread I posted concerning a buddy's modded Forester, you'll see I'm a big fan of Subaru. I also owned a "bug-eyed" WRX for a while, but the new '19 Rav's new look has really impressed me.

 

[Leo99]

Originally Posted by fdcg27
Originally Posted by wemay
On looks and interior alone at least, I like the newest Rav4 more than the newest Forester.


We thought the RAV was pretty bad inside and out as compared to the Forester.
Your post illustrates the reason that both are on the market.
Personal tastes vary.
One man's meat is another man's poison as the old saying goes.


We often disagree on personal preferences but you're right, we are free to choose how we spend our money and having choices is a good thing.

 

[fdcg27]

As I noted in the opening post, the car in question was a 2019 RAV4 XLE.
We found it ***** inside and out with its black hole interior, reminiscent of old GM cars and its heavily textured black paint as well as the overwrought styling.
Others find these cars attractive.
That's why they're sold in significant numbers, although their presence in a rental car fleet might be of some concern to any retail buyer thinking about residual value.

 

[SatinSilver]

I like when Cujet gives his honest reviews of rental cars since they don't seem biased at all. Here's a recent one he posted for a Subaru Legacy 2.5:

Originally Posted by Cujet
I'll keep this review short.

0-60 in 11.2 seconds. This thing is slow. Don't believe the magazine tests which claim 8 seconds. That's a lie!! It's near the danger slow range. Passing is something this car can't do well.

Fuel economy was pen n paper calculated at 30 in mostly highway driving. Rather poor city mpg at under 20.

Engine is a boxer 4cyl, 2.5L and has a most wonderful growl. Despite the utter lack of power.

Car was otherwise perfect. Comfy, drove well, solid feeling, good driving dynamics and a true pleasure for the week.

If you are considering one, get the flat six cylinder version. Night and day difference in driving satisfaction.

 

[wemay]

Originally Posted by fdcg27
As I noted in the opening post, the car in question was a 2019 RAV4 XLE.
We found it ***** inside and out with its black hole interior, reminiscent of old GM cars and its heavily textured black paint as well as the overwrought styling.
Others find these cars attractive.
That's why they're sold in significant numbers, although their presence in a rental car fleet might be of some concern to any retail buyer thinking about residual value.


Ah, I missed that you mentioned it was a 2019, my error. As stated, we all have our preferences and I like both vehicles. Just like one more than the other.

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted by SatinSilver
I like when Cujet gives his honest reviews of rental cars since they don't seem biased at all. Here's a recent one he posted for a Subaru Legacy 2.5:

Originally Posted by Cujet
I'll keep this review short.

0-60 in 11.2 seconds. This thing is slow. Don't believe the magazine tests which claim 8 seconds. That's a lie!! It's near the danger slow range. Passing is something this car can't do well.

Fuel economy was pen n paper calculated at 30 in mostly highway driving. Rather poor city mpg at under 20.

Engine is a boxer 4cyl, 2.5L and has a most wonderful growl. Despite the utter lack of power.
Car was otherwise perfect. Comfy, drove well, solid feeling, good driving dynamics and a true pleasure for the week.

If you are considering one, get the flat six cylinder version. Night and day difference in driving satisfaction.


Problem being that as I pointed out in that thread there is no way that a 3400 pound car with 177 bhp could be that slow unless there were something wrong with it.
If all of the road tests indicate that the Subie is much quicker than Cujet reported, then there must have been something wrong with the car Cujet drove.
Since we own a Subaru with the same powertrain and similar weight, I can tell you now as I posted then that a properly running car is nothing like as slow as Cujet reported.

 

[Al]

Originally Posted by fdcg27


Problem being that as I pointed out in that thread there is no way that a 3400 pound car with 177 bhp could be that slow unless there were something wrong with it.
If all of the road tests indicate that the Subie is much quicker than Cujet reported, then there must have been something wrong with the car Cujet drove.
Since we own a Subaru with the same powertrain and similar weight, I can tell you now as I posted then that a properly running car is nothing like as slow as Cujet reported.

He reported on the Cross trek and had a lot of problems with that too. He seems always get the bad ones.

I drove a '17 NA Subaru. I was very impressed. Not slow by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[pandus13]

Originally Posted by Al
Originally Posted by fdcg27


Problem being that as I pointed out in that thread there is no way that a 3400 pound car with 177 bhp could be that slow unless there were something wrong with it.
If all of the road tests indicate that the Subie is much quicker than Cujet reported, then there must have been something wrong with the car Cujet drove.
Since we own a Subaru with the same powertrain and similar weight, I can tell you now as I posted then that a properly running car is nothing like as slow as Cujet reported.

He reported on the Cross trek and had a lot of problems with that too. He seems always get the bad ones.

I drove a '17 NA Subaru. I was very impressed. Not slow by any stretch of the imagination.

[off-topic]
You US born and first-world problems....
I was elated when I upgraded from the '96 Accent shake-me-brrrr-noisy-purplemobil to the brand new '08 Yaris sedan. That thing was a rocket either going up the Smokies with 2 adult+2 kids+luggage (3-4k RPM at 60-75mph), or doing 90 in IL plainlands. Also handled like a hero the Chicago Southside potholes while loaded with material and tools.
Any of the new Forester or Outback would be pretty much a luxury to me. (and them being just a taller nice looking bigger wagon It would tick all the boxes...)

Back to thread: For some reason, I don't like the look of the Rav4. Just my personal taste.