Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Honda CR-V, Toyota RAV4 or Subaru Forester?



  • tmc1688tmc1688 Posts: 28
    Hi Everyone!

    Which do you all think would be faster in a straight line acceleration? RAV4 V6 2WD or 4WD?

    However consider this statement from edmunds (The available four-wheel-drive system operates in front-drive mode for optimum fuel-efficiency until a situation (such as quick acceleration from a stop or while driving on slippery roads) demands four-wheel drive, at which point up to 45 percent of the torque is transferred to the rear wheels. A "4WD Lock" switch allows one to manually select that maximum torque output to the rear wheels.)
  • tidestertidester Posts: 10,110
    Which do you all think would be faster in a straight line acceleration?

    I believe the 4WD weighs about 140 lbs. more than the 2WD - give or take. That will reduce acceleration somewhat.

    tidester, host
  • kavoomkavoom Posts: 181
    "It's a Class II hitch, even though it's only rated to tow 2000 pounds"

    Class II hitches are rated to 3500 lbs. Don't waste your time on the Subaru Hitch if you are interested in towing anything of substance.
  • Stever@EdmundsStever@Edmunds YooperlandPosts: 39,041
    Ok, we have the Forester coming back from last year's XT flavor largely unchanged, but the CR-V and RAV4 are fresh for the 2007 model year.

    Who's been waiting for the CR-V to hit the showrooms before deciding? Will the lack of a V-6 send you back to Subaru or Toyota?
  • I for one have been waiting.

    Mileage is and actually always has been for me a deciding factor.
    So I will go with a 4 cylinder model whichever I choose.
    And the new CR-V looks good and has good cargo room to boot.

    I guess I'm showing my age as I hope the car is quiet.
  • lgslgs Posts: 27
    >>but the CR-V and RAV4 are fresh for the 2007 model year.<< -

    The 07 Rav4 does not have any substantial changes from the 06.
  • Stever@EdmundsStever@Edmunds YooperlandPosts: 39,041
    Yeah, yeah, so it's bigger for '06 going into '07. It's still sort of fresh in my mind. ;-)
  • Test drove a RAV4 V6 Sport and I gotta say that it is so far the one to beat in the segment. The V6 power delivery is commendable, the handling is tight and the vehicle is quite nimble. This one had only 28 miles on it so there was still a bit of "breaking in" that it needed to do, but Toyota really stepped up with the new model. It feels far more substantial and competent than previous generations.

    Another vehicle that should be compared here is the new Mitsubushi Outlander. Edmunds first drive gave high marks to the new model and it seems every bit as competent as the above mentioned.
  • p0926p0926 Posts: 4,423
    Whoa, just saw a pic of the new model in Consumer Reports and have to say that I hate the new look! Too bad to because they fixed two of the major complaints; the rear door no longer opens to the side and the outside spare tire is gone. However, I'm sure a lot of people will like the new style since it follows the current design trend of making cars more rounded looking but I personally prefer the more boxy and utilitarian look.

    -Frank P.
  • there is a whole forum on the subaru board on this topic...not sure why they just do not link it in here. I think I can summarize as follows: The Subaru Forester is an excellent car that has not changed much over it life...why mess with near perfection I guess. It is really no longer in the same class as the RAV or V though due to is smaller size. Its wagon-like look seems to have limited appeal in the looks dept. It is selling much cheaper in its base version right now, 19K plus tax for an automatic. The new RAV is obviously much larger and a bit more expensive (in its base version). The new V is ugly in my opinion. The biggest negative on the new RAV is the way the rear door opens. IMO though, moving the tire off the rear door so it can open vertically would make the RAV and makes similar cars look more wagon - like. Ever mistake a Highlander for a Forester from a distance from the side....I have.

    All are great vehicles. Check out the other forum for a wealth of comparisons.
  • Stever@EdmundsStever@Edmunds YooperlandPosts: 39,041
    You must be referring to the Subaru Forester vs Toyota RAV4 discussion. Yeah, we are getting some overlap.
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,652
    Honda's argument defending the 4-cylinder-only CRV thinking is dumb. For years we heard the same silly justification about not offering offering a V6 Accord. Guess what? Honda now has a V6 Accord. No, it may not sell in huge numbers, but it's there for Accord folks who want it. The same should be true for the CRV.

    The fact that RAV4 sales have doubled in the past year is due in part to having a V6 as an available engine choice. Sorry, Honda does indeed have its head in the sand (again!) on this matter.

  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    Ya know. I hear there's a market for 2wd cars. I wonder why Subaru doesn't offer one of those... How dumb is that? :P
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,652
    For the same reason Land Rover doesn't make 2WD trucks. For the same reason Rolls Royce doesn't make SUVs. For the same reason Kawasaki doesn't make cars. For the same reason Mack doesn't make pickups...

    It's not part of its DNA. :P

    Actually Subaru does make 2WD cars, but strictly for the JDM market. Their microcars and the bottom-feeder trim level of the Impreza can be had with FWD or AWD.

    Like the never-going-to-happen Accord V6, I bet we will see a V6 CRV someday&#151;and well before we ever see a 2WD Subaru being sold globally.

  • I'm one of those that actually prefers rear wheel drive to front wheel drive. I just like the handling characteristics more.
    On the all-wheel drive front, I reckon all, or at least the vast majority of vehicles, will one day be all-wheel drive. Fine with me.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    What you call DNA is nothing more than a choice. Subaru choses not to participate in a very lucrative market because they value the benefits of AWD more than the benefits of going with 2WD.

    Well, Honda values the benefits of their single engine strategy for the CR-V more than the benefits a V6 might provide.

    Will we see a V6 CR-V? Maybe. But it probably won't happen until they have a V6 which provides the same positive qualities they achieve with an I4. Or might not. Perhaps we'll see a hybrid, or an HCCI engine, or even a fuel cell.

    Unlike Subaru, Honda doesn't peg their designs on a single technology or design. They engineer around ideals and pick the technology or design which best meets those ideals - best tool for the job.

    At this point in time, Honda doesn't see the need for more power to get the job done. Enthusiasts have been clamoring for a V6 since 1997, yet CR-V sales have been climbing up and up. Seems to me Honda is better at understanding the job than enthusiasts.
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,652
    What you call DNA is nothing more than a choice. Subaru choses not to participate in a very lucrative market because they value the benefits of AWD more than the benefits of going with 2WD

    Well, yeah... of course it is a choice...

    They tried FWD before, and they almost went out of business. Being 100% AWD was their savior, is their savior, and will continue to be their savior. That's what Subaru is known for. That's their identity&#151;and hence their "DNA." There's too many 2WD brands out there to compete against, and Subaru is only 100% AWD car brand out there. That makes them pretty special, and keeps them unique in the marketplace. There are plenty of sodas out there but there's only one Coca-Cola. There are plenty of jeans out there but there is only one Levi's. There are plenty of AWD car wannabes out there, but there is only one Subaru.

    Seems to me Honda is better at understanding the job than enthusiasts.

    You seem to be implying that if they had a V6, their sales might be less then what they are. I'm saying&#151;as good as their sales are&#151;they'd even be better if they had a V6 for customers to choose from.

  • p0926p0926 Posts: 4,423
    Honda knows that just about every CR-V competitor -- from Tucson to Santa Fe, from Saturn to Suzuki -- can be had with a six-cylinder engine as standard or optional equipment.

    Huh? What about the Forester? Small SUV - check; four-cylinder engine - check; two rows of seats - check. I guess the Forester is the Rodney Dangerfield of its class... it's named Best SUV three years running by Car & Driver and still gets no respect/recognition :)

  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    Well, that's not what I mean to imply. Sales would probably remain the same. Which means extra effort for no gain.

    Even if they gain 10-20K units per year (which would actually surpass sales of the RAV4), that would result in a slim profit increase to cover an expensive upgrade.
This discussion has been closed.