Howdy, Stranger!

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

Crossover SUV Comparison



  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I thought you sold your late model Explorer, was it a trade?

    How's the 2l before boost kicks in? Is it still responsive enough? I thought that engine didn't come with AWD? :confuse:

    Sorry for all the questions. My buddy here at work got a 3.7l V6 model, traded a Range Rover Sport for it (too $$$ operating costs).
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 9,446
    My wife drives the Escape. I traded the '11 Explorer for a Fusion. Both have the 2.0 ecoboost.
    My wife thinks it's down a little low end power from the 3.0 V6 in the '09.
    Power in both seem more than adequate. I probably would have been ok with the 1.6, but I wanted all the toys, or at least most of them.
    I still have the '02 Explorer.
  • toomanyfumestoomanyfumes S.E. Wisconsin Posts: 892
    I drove an Escape with the 2.0 ecoboost. Didn't have the low end torque of our V6 Outlander but It revved quickly and smooth with no noticeable turbo lag. Handled and rode nice, too. Steering reminded me of my Dad's 2012 Focus, a compact car I really like.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    We seem to be going in that direction, so I expect more small turbos in many segments.
  • fushigifushigi Posts: 1,217
    My '10 Outlander GT AWD V6 is EPA rated 17/24. For 2013 the AWD V6 GT is 19/25 with no major redesign. I'm guessing it's engine & trans programming as weight is about the same and engine size & power and trans # of gears is unchanged.

    Funny, though, the '13 Santa Fe Sport (new name as the Veracruz is now the regular Santa Fe) with the 2.0T only gets 19/24 in AWD guise. And it's 50 pounds lighter than the Outlander.

    So small turbo isn't always better.
  • kyfdx%40Edmundskyfdx%40Edmunds Posts: 25,876
    Our 2011 X3 is rated at 19/25.. 230 HP and 8-speed automatic

    Moderator - Prices Paid, Lease Questions, SUVs

  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    CR was saying the same thing, the smaller turbos seem to fool the EPA in most cases, but the real world numbers aren't always as good as you'd think.

    The turbo makes more power in your example, but is not as linear in the delivery of that power.

    My NC Miata has a 2l engine and rumors have the ND getting a 1.3-1.4l turbo. Not sure how I feel about that. It just wouldn't be nearly as responsive.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I'd pick the straight-6, too. The 2.0T may be more fuel efficient but it's rough, and the stop/start features in particular needs a lot of refining. This was on a 3 series sedan, FWIW.

    I'm sure they'll refine it in the next year or two. It needs it, though.
  • kyfdx%40Edmundskyfdx%40Edmunds Posts: 25,876
    Starting with 2013 model, the 2.0 Turbo is standard.... I'm glad we have the straight-6..

    Moderator - Prices Paid, Lease Questions, SUVs

  • toomanyfumestoomanyfumes S.E. Wisconsin Posts: 892
    I was reading about the '14 Outlander in a magazine, and it looks like they will still offer the GT model with the 3.0 V6. That could be the deciding factor in purchasing another, we really like that drivetrain.
  • fushigifushigi Posts: 1,217
    I like it as well, and since the '14 Outlander has shed some weight fuel econ should be even more improved. Numbers haven't been published that I've seen but I'd expect 20/26 at a minimum.

    That said, the PHEV model is what I'll be tracking. The Chicago area consistently has some of the most expensive gas in the country while also having some of the cheaper electricity rates.
  • fushigifushigi Posts: 1,217
    Kudos to the Subaru Forester & Mitsubishi Outlander Sport.

    For the Escape, Patriot, Encore, Sportage, Tucson, Wrangler, Rogue, CX-5, Tiguan and CR-V, you have some work to do.

    Personally, I'm glad that IIHS continues to make crash testing more difficult to pass. In the event I'm in an accident, my car's job is to sacrifice itself to protect me & my loved ones.

    That the Subie & Mitsu both weigh around 3300 pounds with AWD means that the added safety isn't coming with added weight (the AWD Rogue is almost 3500 pounds).
  • I'm considering one of these two cars as my next purchase. I currently drive a 2001 Volvo S80, which I purchased used in 2005. At the time it had about 40,000 miles on it, and now it has 170,000. I have been really happy with the car overall, however it's starting to show it's age on the inside (plastic parts starting to break, leather badly worn on the driver's seat). I love the comfort of the car, especially the seats.

    I did not find the car overly expensive to maintain. Yes, there are some issues, and not as inexpensive as my old Toyota Corolla, but overall the satisfaction rate has been pretty high.

    I have really been interested in Audi for a while, and I'm drawn to the Q5.

    Can anyone give me some insight into Audi?
    I hear they have a lot of issues, but I'm wondering how true that really is. If I go with the Audi, how often can I expect to be at the dealership with an issue: once per year? every 6 months? Once per month? Overall, what should I budget for repairs per year?

    Whichever one I go with, I am planning on buying used (two to three years).

    Your advise is appreciated!
  • jeffmcjeffmc Posts: 1,742
    edited July 2013
    A good site for looking at specific issues is You can look at specific reports from individual Q5 owners to see not just overall reliability, but also what types of issues are most common for the various years. I know Consumer Reports had some serious things to say about the Q5, but truedelta may be able to nail down more specifics on any issues. If reliability is a concern, how about a Lexus RX? An upper-trim Subaru Outback may be a solidly reliable choice that could save you a few dollars as well... it's one of the safest vehicles on the road, and top-of-the-line models have quite a few features and good driving dynamics. Here's a link to Q5 reliability on truedelta:
    You do have to join to see complete in-depth data, but there's no fee, all they ask is that you reply to their quarterly e-mail about reliability of your own vehicle. Happy hunting! :)
  • fushigifushigi Posts: 1,217
    Reading the comparo makes me happy to stay with Mitsubishi.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 9,446
    Edmunds took their CX-5 on a long trip and got a bit over 24 mpg.

    Out west trip
  • stickguystickguy Posts: 13,584
    my nephew has a 1 YO RAV4 (with the spare tire). a 4 cyl. I asked him, and he said he gets about 26mpg on a highway run. I get 27-28 in our RDX. I am sure he beats us around town, but the combo of cylinder deactivation, tall gearing, and other tricks makes the V6 amazingly economical cruising.

    I drove down to the shore last week, and on a leg with a back highway stretch (so some lights) then a 75mph highway run, when I got off the TC was sitting at 30.4. Even backroad running after that and overall I got ~29 on that trip.

    2013 Acura RDX (wife's), 2007 Volvo S40 (when daughter lets me see it), 2000 Acura TL (formerly son's, now mine again), and new Jetta SE (son's first new car on his own dime!)

  • I can read about performance, reliability and such till I'm blue in the face. My question is more of a shallow/cosmetic one. I loved my 98 CRV. I am finally in a position to buy something newer (possibly brand new) and all the compact SUVs have that sleek design making them looking like small minivan- soccer mom cars. I liked that my older CR-V had more of that truck look while still being a small car.

    Any thoughts on crossovers that look more Jeep-y for lack of a better fake word?
  • Stever@EdmundsStever@Edmunds YooperlandPosts: 38,931
    The Forester has been "updated" but it's still somewhat boxy.

    You could go whole hog and get a Transit Connect. :-)
Sign In or Register to comment.