Subaru Forester vs Toyota RAV4

ak4net2 · August 2003

Slightly off the topic but this seemed like the best place:

I am looking to buy a new RAV4 (2003) or a Subaru Impreza 2.5T (2004) within 1 week.

Please advise. My criteria are: should have good pick-up/ power, good internal comfort, has to be automatic, OK-looks, milage and safety. Both I and my wife need to drive. Need not go off-road and rare snow here in Richmond. Therefore I am wondering if I really need AWD for FWD is OK. I may also indulge in a sun-roof but may need a aftermarket one for Subaru.
I have got quotes of ~21000 for RAV4 and ~20000 for Subaru.

Please do advise. Thanks

rsholland · August 2003

The Impreza should be quicker (bigger engine with more HP & torque), and will certainly handle better than the Rav4. It will also pull better when fully loaded (again, more torque). Also, the Impreza, being a car, is subject to more stringent crash standards than the Rav4.

The Rav4 will certainly accomodate more stuff inside.

As to the AWD, you will find it also much better on rain-slick roads too. Don't just think of it as a snow benefit. AWD (TS or Rav4) works for you year-round.

Bob

ateixeira · August 2003

I'm surprised you're not comparing the RAV4 to a Forester, but I digress...

With automatic, no replacement for displacment, the 2.5l will have an edge over the 2.0l carrying a boxier shape. The trade-off is less room inside, mostly height (for headroom and tall cargo).

With AWD, the TS should be more fuel efficient. You can get a FWD RAV4, that would be close.

FWIW, you can do a LOT better than $20k for a TS. Drive 2 hours north to fitzmall.com, they have TS wagons for $16,341. That $5 grand will pay for gas for a decade.

Better yet, get the better equipped Outback Sport, those are $17,170 at the same dealer. You get 16" alloys and a bunch more features, it's a bargain. That still saves you $4 grand.

BTW, those prices include freight. Our family has purchased 4 Subarus from that dealer, so I can tell you those prices are legit.

-juice

rsholland · August 2003

Drive north to White Flint, MD; a suburb of DC, to FitzMall to check prices. Their White Flint store sells Subarus. If you drive another 20 minutes more up I-270, to their Gathersburg store, they sell both Subarus and Toyotas. Here's the link:

http://www.fitzgeraldautomall.com/

Bob

ak4net2 · August 2003

Thanks Bob and Juice..

Actually I was adding the S/Roof, a cassette+CD deck instead of just CD and all tags, titles, taxes to the $20K , but the link you have given still works out at around $1K less

Thanks a lot..I have queried Fitz and will simultaneously push my local dealer..

The reason I am not looking at Forester is b'coz I want to stay within $20-21K.
Your point abt. O/B sport is great...but I was not able to justify to myself why to pay $1K more (only diff seems to be harder suspension and fog lights. I did not really need the harder suspension) and kinda liked the body colored bumbers in the TS..

Anything I am missing between the TS and O/B?
Amit

ateixeira · August 2003

Let's see, I have a 2002 buyer's guide, per them it says: cruise, outside temp gauge, floor mats, cargo tray, fogs, spoiler, roof rack, and the suspensions and 16" alloys. Seems like a bargain for a grand, IMO.

Here are some more tips - remember you can buy the moonroof seperately. In fact, we have Adler & Mandell install a powered one for us, in our Legacy. It's an ASC 750 and is pretty big, 17"x30". One touch open/close, even programmable to close when you remove the key. We love it. It was $900.

Finally, for the radio, consider E-Baying a WRX take-off 6CD changer + Cassette. They go for about $150 nowadays, that's cheap. It's very easy to install, in fact I've done TWO of them myself, one in our Forester and another in our Legacy. I can do it in under one hour, and the harness plugs right in. Our Subaru Crew will help you with install tips, it's cake.

You can also find some in the NASIOC classifieds. They are plentiful, seriously.

So, for $1050 plus that Outback Sport, you're golden. You will really enjoy the Subaru community, FWIW, I really do. We have a weekly chat, the only one on Edmunds, SoA presence here too.

-juice

dcm61 · August 2003

Never mind (as Emily Littella (sp?) of SNL fame).

DaveM

stever · August 2003

Some weeks it works. Honest.

Steve, Host

ak4net2 · September 2003

My local dealer is not moving. I will probably drive down to Fitz this Saturday and buy as per your suggestion. Could you please tell me more details on:

1. Is the internet delivered price on Fitzautomall the final price or is ther more room? 'coz the site gives a price of 17298 for Impreza 2.5TS auto and 18340 for OB Sports Auto.
Is the difference with what you mentioned due to 2004 vs. 2003?
2. Sun roof. Where can I get it installed and how?
3. I hope there is no issue in getting my services and warranty at any of the local dealers in Richmond if I buy from Fitz.

Thanks once again. BTW when is the next Subaru discussion?

ak

lark6 · September 2003

Bob, you and juice are more experienced with Fitzmall pricing schemes, so riddle me this:

Fitz shows "Delivered Internet Price", "Delivered Value Price", invoice and MSRP for all the cars in stock. Looking specifically at their Forester inventory, I see that the "Delivered Internet Price" and "Delivered Value Price" is below invoice for all models except the XT. For XTs their "Delivered Internet Price" is below invoice but their "Delivered Value Price" is above invoice. Any ideas as to why the discrepancy?

Ed

ateixeira · September 2003

The Value Price includes 3 free oil changes (and a bit extra), 1 free service per year for the first 3 years, basically. It also includes a free service loaner during that time.

It's about $300 for the privilege. If you are price shopping just look at the Internet Price, which you can walk-in and get even if you do not have internet access.

To answer those questions:

1) no, there is no room to haggle, the experience is stress-free, they focus on getting you the car and options you like. Prices are good IMO. Their fee is $49, compare that to $300 at some stealers (oops, dealers).

2) Near the Rockville location is Adler & Mandell Auto Upholstery, they are an ASC approved vendor. For $900 or so they installed our Legacy's ASC Model 750 roof. They basically fit the biggest moonroof they can in your car for that price. Call 411, ask for Adler & Mandell in Rockville, MD, they are listed.

3) You can service from any Subie dealer, they make profits from service, not sales, so they'll be glad to take you.

If you'd feel better having a reference, e-mail me (it's in my profile) and I'll put you in touch with my salesman. He does all the VIP deals for that dealership. He sold us a Legacy, my dad an Outback, and my sister a Forester, kept us loyal by following just by one simple rule: being honest.

-juice

rsholland · September 2003

The cheapest Fitz price does not include a loaner when your car is in for service, whereas the other price does (I think?). Am I correct on that?

Bob

stever · September 2003

Next chat is Thursday evening at 9 ET. Look for the chat link at the top of any Subaru specific discussion, and it'll be linked on the left sidebar all day Thursdays.

Steve, Host

ateixeira · September 2003

Correct Bob, that was the other benefit.

Note that if you buy a Subaru Gold Extended Warranty you are guaranteed a loaner.

-juice

fryingbologna · September 2003

and, in my books, it is the closest competition for the Forester right now. It actually looks like the RAV4 might have a bit more feature-wise than the Forester, interior-wise, with the MP3 stereo, as well as the VDC system for traction. "Full time 4 wheel drive"? Are they going the Subaru route? Still that rear tire shell/no bumper/swinging tailgate bizarreness, though.

I need some expert thoughts, some not-so-expert thoughts, and perhaps some sort of exorcism as I move that much closer to a purchase.

rsholland · September 2003

is still only 1500 pounds (I picked up a brochure yesterday). The Forester's towing is 2000/2400 (auto/manual), but yes, the upgrades on the new Rav4 are much welcomed, and it is definitely a more worthy competitor for the Forester.

Bob

ateixeira · September 2003

It's getting a 2.4l, so power will be in line with the CR-V and the non-turbo Forester. That's a good start.

VSC and Navigation will be options, even turn signals in the mirrors. This stuff is starting to trickle down, which is good. Loaded prices might get a little scary, we'll see.

-juice

fryingbologna · September 2003

that Toyota Canada will not even offer the traction and stability control as options! Is this some kind of payback for the Forester XT MT moonroofs?

p0926 · September 2003

"Is this some kind of payback for the Forester XT MT moonroofs?"

LOL! Hey I'll trade you a loaded RAV4 for a XT MT Premium :-) Want to meet at the border?

-Frank P.

fryingbologna · September 2003

I don't think my Prime Minister will let me!

ateixeira · September 2003

Good one! :-)

-juice

suvshopper4 · September 2003

If you might have adult passengers in the rear seats, be sure to compare - not just leg room when seated, but the ease of getting in and out of the vehicle.

Also, the rear seats in the RAV4 are easily removeable - a nice feature.

Keep 'em frying!

alpha01 · September 2003

Isnt VSC now standard on the RAV, as opposed to optional? Toyota has made VSC standard on all its sport utes, 4, 6, or 8 cylinder, for 2004.

A good move, IMO.

~alpha

ateixeira · September 2003

Coincidentally, I drove a RAV4 yesterday.

I went to test drive an MR2, but we took a RAV4 to and from a remote parking lot to pick up that car.

While rear leg room is better, width is really tight, and the split seats really make this a 4 seater.

It seems to lean over a lot, kind feels tippy, but the vantage point is great, you feel like King of the Road. Of course I drove a Miata and an MR2 back-to-back, so anything would be higher than those two.

It was an automatic, the engine kind of struggles to really get it moving, it felt buzzy. The 1.8l in the MR2 does not, oddly, the engine seemed more quiet.

Basically the 2.4l should be a nice upgrade, giving it more relaxed power, especially with the auto. The 5 speed is probably fine with the current 2.0l engine.

-juice

nippononly · September 2003

if you want 4WD, it is pretty hard to find a 5-speed RAV, at least around here. That is the great thing about the Subie, 5 speeds are plentiful.

With the 2.4, Toyota has finally brought the RAV up to the power the Forester has had all along, and with the same fuel efficiency. It surprises me that the company that builds the extremely thrifty Corolla cannot build a mini-ute with great fuel economy. It would be nice if both of these could bring combined fuel economy up to high 20s, even 30. (Obviously that comment does not apply to the XT!).

ateixeira · September 2003

I was impressed with the MR2's mileage, 25/33. That's remarkable because it's also quick.

I didn't like the SMG option, it dropped the throttle too abruptly to shift, almost like the car was stalling. It would actually slow the car down before each shift, even when you were accelerating briskly.

Take-offs were butter-smooth, though. Reverse too. And the buttons on the wheel made it feel like an F1 car.

If they could only tune the de-throttle smoothly, it's very promising technology.

-juice

rsholland · September 2003

as you said, this is a great time to test-drive cars. You should try a Murano AWD with the CTV. That way you will have sampled two of the latest in terms of "new" trannys.

Bob

ateixeira · September 2003

That and an Audi CVT. I'm a fan of many of these new concepts, but the execution is often lacking.

-juice

rsholland · September 2003

is not AWD.

Bob

ateixeira · September 2003

I think they're fixing that for next model year? Maybe, oh well.

I'm not sure if the RAV4 I test drove was FWD or AWD, but it felt like FWD to me, with a little tug at the steering wheel in turns.

-juice

suvshopper4 · September 2003

"we took a RAV4 to and from a remote parking lot to pick up that car."
How far did you drive? Was it from a cold start? Did you factor in that pedal-feel is different among many vehicles?

At 45,000 miles, my '01 RAV is not buzzy or tippy (very secure on the road), has adequate power for this non-leadfoot driver (2.0L with auto trans), gives good mileage (24.8 overall in a state that requires MTBE / winter gas), and has given me no problems. I think it is possible to get another 10+ enjoyable, trouble-free years out of it. That's the plan, anyway.

ateixeira · September 2003

I didn't measure, but I'll guesstimate it was about 3 miles each way. I guess they use it as a shuttle to that lot, because it was already warm.

Perhaps the engine had a loose heat shield on the exhaust? That's kind of what it sounded like at high revs.

The tippy comment again surely was exacerbated by the fact that I drove a Miata to the dealer, then the RAV4, then the MR2 Spyder, then the RAV4 again, and finally, my Miata. I guess any SUV would feel that way.

But still, my Forester leans less, for sure.

What did you mean by pedal feel? For the most part, the controls were light and easy to operate, nothing to complain about there.

-juice

ken_from_nj · October 2003

the other evening i went to the grocery store, parked & their were no cars around me. when i came out - there were 3 rav 4's to the left of my forester & 1 more on the right. it was really cool to see i had the one 'unique' small suv/wagon thingy and as i was putting the goods in the gate - one of the rav4 owners came out and while putting his stuff away - was eyeballing the heck outta my forester. that was fun....

dstew1 · November 2003

The availability of the SWB RAV4 V6 in the US might make me consider cheating on my FXT.

yogi29035 · April 2004

I visited a school recently for work and in the back row of the parking lot were 4 (!)Foresters all parked next to each other, so I slotted my Impreza in next to 'em and we made a little Subie Section.

Whenever I see another Impreza in a lot, I always park next to it if I can cuz I always think its funny.... but I don't know why....

ateixeira · April 2004

Birds of a feather...

-juice

estocoffee · May 2004

Yeah and when I phoned Toyota Canada they said it was because of their cusotmer surveys (they never asked me - a 14 year Tercel owner ). I suspect however that Toyota fears litigation in the states more so than north of the 49th. Many safety features that are being offered to Americans in 04 were not planned for Canada in 05.
So I became a proud forester owner.

paulcudlip · August 2004

Looked at both and it was a no brainer. After doing research on both vehicles, the RAV 4 was the hands down choice. J D Powers isn't kind to Subaru.

mnf · August 2004

Both are great choices but going by JD power ?? Remember back in 1999 they gave the DAEWOO a very high rating i believe #2 so ratings sometimes are not all what they seem to be.

stever · August 2004

Looks like it was #4 and based on a sample of first year owners (since it launched in '99). Bet they won't do that again :-)

link

Steve, Host

mikenk · August 2004

I think JD Powers is incredibly overhyped based on the information it really provides. Initial owners survey say nothing about long term reliability of a car; the 3 year survey would seem to be more useful except that most cars todays are reliable through the third year making that marker questionable for predicting the future reliability. I also question the statistical validity of their survey. But the press loves the JDPowers reports.

The only useful tool I have seen to measure the real reliability is the CU ongoing surveys that show the trends as cars age. The Toyota brand is clearly has the best reliability for long term ownership. Subaru has very good ranking in these studies.

Personally, I would not think reliability would be an issue in deciding between these two cars, but if that is the top of you list, you can't go wrong with Toyota.

ateixeira · August 2004

Daewoo rocks, they'll never go bankrupt...wait a sec! ;-)

RAV4 and Forester have actually tied for 2nd place in the past in the IQ study, and they usually make the top 3.

Keep in mind the Forester is the highest scoring Subaru, so if you're talking about scores for all Subarus, you're watering down the data a bit. The Baja scores poorly, but that doesn't mean the Forester does.

Subaru beat Toyota in the JDP Dealer Satisfaction study that just came out.

So what?

-juice

suvshopper4 · August 2004

Yeah, not too high on my list.

Toyota beat all other brands in the latest JDP 3-year customer survey.

What most surprised me was that GM was in the top 5 (along with Toyota, Honda, BMW, Porsche), and only the top 5 were rated above average.

And Land Rover was the absolute bottom finisher. Well, maybe that's why their vehicles are so cheap to buy...

postal40 · August 2004

i was surprised that GM was in top 5 too , why did the cutomers select them ? the rebates ? LOL

egret · September 2004

Test-drove a 2005 Forester, automatic transission, not turbo, and a 2004, front-wheel drive, automatic transmission RAV-4 yesterday in 103-degree southern Arizona weather, and perceived that they both took about the same time to cool but that the RAV-4 ended up somewhat cooler in the back seat. Anybody else have experiences with how well the AC works for either vehicle in very hot weather, especially in the back seat (want to keep it cool for infant in carseat)?
TIA

brooky · September 2004

Has anyone in an '04 RAV4 tried to merge with big trucks going 80mph or better on Arizona freeways, or, for that matter, driven through the Salt River Canyon? My '04 Subaru Forester XT does well under these conditions, but I'm wondering if the RAV4 has enough performance capability to make the grade.

p0926 · September 2004

Because of the Forester's greenhouse-like interior, it especially benefits from having tinted windows. Unfortunately because Subaru chose to classify it as a passenger car, factory tint isn't an option. However, there are a number of high-quality after-market tint films and a Forester with tinted windows can easily handle 100 degree heat. 35% tint in the front and 20% rear will provide a cool interior (including the backseat) but still leave you with excellent visibility.

-Frank

p0926 · September 2004

I don't think it's fair to compare the Forester XT to the RAV4. The X and XS models are direct competitors but when it comes to acceleration, the XT is in a whole different league.

-Frank

tazereli · September 2004

If you are currently driving an XT, a rav4 is going to feel woefully inadequate. X or XS is a much closer comparison. If you currently have an XT why even consider a Rav4? To me thats like saying do I want the filet or the ground chuck?

Regards,
Kyle

brooky · September 2004

My lease on the XT will be up in less than a year and I do like the looks of the RAV4. Also I'd just like to make a change for the fun of it. But from what guys have said, I get the strong impression that the RAV4 might not be a good choice--for taking longer trips anyway. I drove a Chevy Tracker before the Subaru. Talk about underpowered and dangerous (especially from the crash test standpoint)! I used it only for short local trips around home. My thank to both of you for the advice.

Subaru Forester vs Toyota RAV4

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles