Howdy, Stranger!

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





Getting a new Outlander, CR-V or RAV4

124»

Comments

  • comem47comem47 Posts: 395
    According to this the 4 Cly 4B12 uses a timing chain.
    The 6 cyl timing belt is good for 105K/84 months(7 yrs), whichever first BTW.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_4B1_engine#Specifications_4

    Needing towing power, I opted for the 6 cylinder and have been very pleased .
    The 6 speed tranny is smooth and I've gotten as much as 28MPG on the highway
    (usually around 20 around town and 25+ on highway with my 4WD LS model.)

    While I haven't driven a CVT, the concept sounds a bit weird to me (keep the engine revving and vary the coupling, Sounds like it would be noisier)
  • bolt22bolt22 Posts: 1
    I'm in the market for a Outlander SE fwd.I've received quotes from dealers for
    26K, does this sound right. I thought the prices should be around 21 or 22K.
    What has been the experience of everyone during your buying experience.
  • fushigifushigi Posts: 1,249
    An SE FWD in my zip code and with no options at all has an Edmunds TMV of $22463 after a $1K rebate. Options would drive that up, especially nav & rear-seat entertainment.

    An SE as I would equipment it (F5, G4, FW, F6, GQ, GL, GS, and GD) has a TMV of $24079 after that same $1K rebate.

    Is your price an out-the-door price (includes sales tax & all fees)?
  • Considering both. Any opinions appreciated. I'm worried about the seats in the CRV being comfortable on long trips. I've seen some comments on MSN Autos, Edmunds, KBB where the owners complain about seat comfort. Thanks in advance!
  • the 'internet sales' would give you a fairly lower quote to lure you into their showroom, when u got to their showroom, the sales on the floor would tell you the 'internet sales' work from home and they dont honor the quote they gave. 'there is MISCOMMUNICATION' and then you will have sit there listening to them for hours....
  • ohiobobohiobob Posts: 4
    From experience, Toyota has the best manufacturing processes in the automotive industry and Honda is close behind. Toyota and Honda consistently rank very high in quality/reliability. I've read nearly every article in Road&Track, Car&Driver, Motor Trend etc. and they rank the CRV and RAV4 ahead of the Outlander. I recently bought a RAV4 and my 3 finalist were the CRV, RAV and the Subaru Forester. I downselected the CRV because the engine just didn't seem as responsive although the interior was nice. I didn't like the way the rear seats folded and the gymnastics with locking them in place when the Toyota is a one touch operation. The Subaru was nice but the base version's interior was cheap looking and feeling and my wife just didn't like it. I felt the RAV was a good blend of space, efficiency and my past experience with 2 4Runners with zero problems and the fact that the Subaru dealer just couldn't match the price of the RAV sealed the deal for me. I bought a base model with the extra value package (roof rack, tinted windows, mats and a few other things for under 21K.
  • motoguy128motoguy128 Posts: 146
    I'm worried about the seats in the CRV being comfortable on long trips.

    I had the same concerns, and test drove a EX-L and EX a couple times before I decided I could live with hte cloth. After a week of driving, they seem more comfortable every time I get in. On msot car, my left leg gest sore after an hour. Not the case with the CRV. The side bolsters are excellent. Might be narrow for a "wider" person.... but fits really nice if you have a <36" waist.

    I don't like the RAV4 interior. It's too busy. They are trying too hard to make lower quality materials look interesting. Otherwise, the RAV 4 has more power than the CRV and quaity and reliability is very good. I've found the brakes on most Toyotas to be marginal. Not much feel and when loaded with passengers and luggage, they take a LOT of force ot stop the car with a newer Camry I drove.

    The brakes and handling of the CR-V are what put it on top over the others. The Nissan Rogue was a close second, but visibility is poor and the back seat and cargo space is small. It's a little expensive for what you get.

    AS for Mitsubishi? Well, the dealer network is pretty sparse outside of major cities and even then, you may be limited to 1 or 2 dealers. Not good for a car with average to below average quality (they used to and still do share a lot of Chrysler parts). CVT's and 4 cylinders can be a good combo IF, big IF, the engine is very torquey so it doesn't need ot rev like crazy. The Rogue is marginal... and that's a very storong 4 cylinder. I'd expect the Outland 4 cyliner ot be almsot as buzzy as the Compass or Patriot.
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    "you may be limited to 1 or 2 dealers. Not good for a car with average to below average quality (they used to and still do share a lot of Chrysler parts)."

    Wow, did you do any research before posting your opinion on Mitsubishi, or it is just your expert opinion? We have about 20 Mitsubishi dealerships in Chicago metro area, if I can call it a major city. Ten years/100K powertrain warranty, and 5 years road assistance should help, if ever needed. As far as quality (which is one of the the highest in its class for Outlander by the way), this car is 100% build in Japan with 0% association with Chrysler or any of it's parts. It would be nice, if you could voice your opinion after reading any reviews, test driving the car, or actually talking with any real owners. Otherwise, enjoy your girly over hyped, owerpriced and underpowered She-R-V.
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Posts: 2,797
    Otherwise, enjoy your girly over hyped, owerpriced and underpowered She-R-V.

    Unless the Mitsubishi comes with a manual, it is no more manly than the She-RV. Either one is a eunic without the clutch.

    I'll just keep my 05 He-RV with a clutch and run circles around V6 powered SheUV's.
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    "I'll just keep my 05 He-RV with a clutch and run circles around V6 powered SheUV's"

    With 160 Hp and 4.450 lbs of gross weight, you shouldn't have any problems. As long as they are parked. :)
  • chelentanochelentano Posts: 634
    Outlander has no Chrysler parts: made in Japan. Honda cars on the other hand made in America using 59% American parts :)
    http://www.boston.com/cars/news/articles/2006/09/24/made_in_america_hard_to_tell- /
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Posts: 2,797
    With 160 Hp and 4.450 lbs of gross weight, you shouldn't have any problems. As long as they are parked

    0-60 in 8 seconds is pretty indicative of the vehicle's capabilities with just 4 cylinders.

    Next...
  • comem47comem47 Posts: 395
    The V6 Outlander tows 3500 lbs. Now what is the towing on the CRV?
    How about the warranty differences?

    Next....
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    I hope 8 sec is not your optimistic estimate only. Can you point to any official specs page we can verify it? The numbers I was able to find were in the 10-12 sec range. And that changes everything... Outlander V6 time is 8.1 sec, and Rav4 V6 - 7.1 sec
    ( from Edmunds and Motor Trend tests). How exactly you are going to run dose circles again?
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    &#147;The base powertrain in the CRV is fine for normal family transportation. But as soon as you try to do things like tow, or fill it with four people and their cargo, or lower the back seats and load it with something heavy it's not up to the task&#148;.
    &#147;I agree with Edmunds. The CR-V is a very well laid out vehicle, but the engine is just lacking. It's fine around town, but hit the highway and catching up to traffic is another thing entirely&#148;.
    &#147;I do, getting on the highway where most cars do 65mph and trying to get up to speed is where the CR-V has problems. &#147;
    &#147;And I've driven through hills and mountains in upstate NY with my CR-V, the grade-logic does nothing. You simply must be in D3 mode. You don't even have to tow anything to feel the lag, just load it up with 4 adults and their cargo. &#147;
    &#147;0-60 in a leisurely 10 seconds is not adequate. And it gets worse when loaded up with people and cargo.&#148;

    You can read rest of the posts in this tread &#148; Honda loses yet another Edmunds comparo,&#148; in one of the Honda entusiasts blogs, which name I can't mention here.
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Posts: 2,797
    The V6 Outlander tows 3500 lbs. Now what is the towing on the CRV?
    How about the warranty differences?


    And what do you suggest I tow?

    Besides, if you are regularly towing something that is 3500 lbs, maybe you should be looking into a body on frame vehicle, not a unibody?

    Hondas come with 5 years/60,000 mile powertrain warranty.

    Next....
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Posts: 2,797
    I hope 8 sec is not your optimistic estimate only. Can you point to any official specs page we can verify it? The numbers I was able to find were in the 10-12 sec range. And that changes everything... Outlander V6 time is 8.1 sec, and Rav4 V6 - 7.1 sec
    ( from Edmunds and Motor Trend tests). How exactly you are going to run dose circles again?


    I tested mine with G-tech device.

    Here is the old review from Edmunds for the 2002 model.

    http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/do/vdp/articleId=48575/pageNumber=2

    Next time I am in Chicago, I will show you exactly how I run circles around those vehicles...
  • comem47comem47 Posts: 395
    Hondas come with 5 years/60,000 mile powertrain warranty.

    Next..

    That's the bumper to bumper with roadside assistance on the Outlander. Powertrain is 10 yr/100K.

    As for towing I regularly tow 1600 lbs effortlessly in winder. I have the ability to go to 3500. Most all the silimilar CUVs are 1000 lbs (Rav 4 is the same and Subaru is 2400). I'm Just referencing your original claim of running around the Outlander in circles with a CRV.. And I've gotten 27 mph on hwy (typical over 25). 20 is typical around town only driving. Did a rather nice job of hauling a 4X8 sheet of plywood and 8' 2X4's last week (with the tailgate down only 2 foot sticks beyond it.) That's what I call utility. Yes, my old Dakota and wife's Durango could haul more, but 15MPG on a good day. (I love parking the Outlander, tightest turning radius I've ever had).
    ..
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    You are on.
    While 8.7 sec 0-60 from that article is really not bed, it is still slower than Mitsubishi and Rav4. Sorry, no circles for you this time. Try Escape forum .
  • comem47comem47 Posts: 395
    While old habits are hard to break (I even ordered a stick for my V8 Dakota back in '98 not for speed, but preference) I think it's a dream to think the 5 speed stick 4 cyl CRV is going to out accelerate the 220 HP 6 speed auto V6 Outlander.

    Honda doesn't even offer a stick now (2009)anyway. So with currently available vehicles it's

    166 HP 5 speed auto 4 cyl at 3549 lbs for the 4WD CRV to
    220 HP 6 speed auto V6 at 3781 lbs for the 4WD Outlander.
    (you can manually paddle shift at the wheel if you want).

    But go ahead, flail away!!! and take on the 269 HP RAV 4 while at it. :P
  • motoguy128motoguy128 Posts: 146
    I think he's comparing 4 cylinder models here... with similar equipment, pricing and fuel economy.

    I think he's also comparing the lighter Gen 2.5 with the 5 speed manual.

    So not really a fair comparison all around.

    It's not a secret that the 3rd genration CR-V won't win any races. But most folks that buy Hondas but them for the all around package, not the raw power under the hood.

    If a RAV4 had the same steering, brakes and ergonomics as the CR-V, and didn't have the weird interior styling, I would consider it.

    Also, peak horsepower numbers don't show how a engine performs in the bottom end and midrange where it's driving in the real world 99% of the time. I don't spend all day redlining my CR-V.
  • comem47comem47 Posts: 395
    If you read article 102 he made the boast:

    "I'll just keep my 05 He-RV with a clutch and run circles around V6 powered SheUV's." (Impliing a stick is more important than displacement).

    Torque is what is key (hp can be peaky, but low end torque is what accelerates from a rest and makes a vehicle more drivable in traffic vs high rpm rice rocket that needs to slip the clutch at 5K to move from rest.)
  • lori56lori56 Posts: 19
    Yes, I also find that in most cars my left leg goes numb, but in the '09 CRV, I am more comfortable, and my leg doesn't lean against the door.... I have a '04 Rav 4, and that car now seems cramped in comparison... I also find the CRV to give a smoother ride...
  • motoguy128motoguy128 Posts: 146
    Acceleration is a combination of torque and gearing. A V6 making 200 ft-lbs but with a 0.70 gear ratio, will accelerate the same as the same vehcile making 100ft-lbs but with a 1.40 gear ratio. Of course, the smaller engine is running twice the RPM's so they are both rpoducing the same HP.

    So yes, torque is the most improtant, but it's the gearing that determines how it accelrates... that's in part how a manual transmission can have an advantage.

    To understand it better, consider how quickly a 600cc motorcycle accelerates in 3rd gear at say 10,000 RPM vs. 2nd gear at 10,000 RPM. Both are making the same torque and horsepower, the only difference is how fast they are traveling, and the mechanical advantage available. You'll find that even if you factor out wind drag, a vehcile will accelerate proportional to the gear ratio at a given RPM.
  • comem47comem47 Posts: 395
    One upon a time 4 cylinder automatics were so lossy and badly set up that indeed you better have a stick or you couldn't get out of your own way . My sister's auto Pinto back in '73 comes to mind. When it downshifted it would scream as the revs soared, but go no faster! :cry: It's a lot different today with much better designed 4 cylinder autos, and I know I couldn't out-shift my 6 speed auto in the V6 Outlander. I know I also prefer towing in an auto, so much easier in stop and go traffic. ;)
  • toomanyfumestoomanyfumes S.E. Wisconsin Posts: 904
    The six-speed auto in the V6 Outlander is programmed great for shifting when you need power, lower rpm's for cruising, etc. I've always liked stickshifts, but I don't miss it at all in my Outlander. :D
  • When making comparisons, we need to fairly compare the inline four cylinder versions of each vehicle.

    ******************

    According to Consumer Guide to Auto, the 2008 Mitsubishi I4 clocks in at 9.4 seconds from 0-60.

    Link

    And according to the test data from Motor Trend for the 2008 models, it appears the CR-V and RAV4s inline four engines perform pretty much on par with each other...with a slight edge to the CR-V's 0-60 in 9.2 seconds compared to RAV4's 0-60 in 9.5 seconds. Unfortunately, I couldn't find the report for the 2009 RAV4 I4 which has added horsepower up to 179 rpm, nor the 2009 CR-V report. I would say all the comparable I4s have similar acceleration.

    2008 Toyota RAV4 I4

    Link

    TEST DATA
    Acceleration to mph
    0-30 3.3 sec
    0-40 4.8
    0-50 7
    0-60 9.5
    0-70 12.2
    0-80 16.5
    Passing, 45-65 mph 5.0 sec
    Quarter mile 17.1 sec @ 81.5 mph
    Braking, 60-0 mph 123 ft
    Lateral acceleration 0.71 g (avg)
    MT figure eight 30.0 sec @ 0.52 g (avg)
    Top-gear revs @ 60 mph 2200 rpm

    ************************************

    2008 Honda CR-V I4

    Link

    TEST DATA
    Acceleration to mph
    0-30 3.0 sec
    0-40 4.6
    0-50 6.7
    0-60 9.2
    0-70 12.2
    0-80 16.6
    Passing, 45-65 mph 4.8 sec
    Quarter mile 17.0 sec @ 81.1 mph
    Braking, 60-0 mph 134 ft
    Lateral acceleration 0.76 (avg)
    MT figure eight 28.8 sec @ 0.56 g (avg)
    Top-gear revs @ 60 mph 1900 rpm
  • comem47comem47 Posts: 395
    "When making comparisons, we need to fairly compare the inline four cylinder versions of each vehicle."

    Normally yes, but in this case, No.

    What started this conversation is a statement someone made about how their 2005 4 cylinder CRV with a stick would smoke any V6 CUV automatic.

    It's truly apples to oranges, but there you have it.
124»
This discussion has been closed.