Options
Subaru Forester vs Toyota RAV4
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
That didn't even make it into the MY07 Forester brochure.
Maybe it was a late addition to the lineup, and they did it because they knew the criteria for the pending IIHS tests?
If so, smart marketing move by Subaru. Hats off to them.
Most readers of the results will just remember the mfr's name in a positive way, and not the specifics.
VDC should be put on all models. There are JDM models with manual trannies that have it so no excuses, though it will add to the price.
-juice
my first post here. like everyone else, I am also trying to decide between RAV4 07 V6 2WD and subaru forester. Test drove subaru on a really cold day with ice on the road. to my surprise it spun on ice like a rear wheal drive vehicle. I was a bit disappointed to see that as I did not expect that at all after reading such good reviews. I tried same thing on ice with my honda civic and even that didnt spin. I wonder if all time 50/50 AWD is not the best thing on really slippery surfaces( as most of the vehicle weight is in front and 50 percent power in rear overpowers the front wheels???) and wonder if on demand AWD of RAV4 will be safer(less chance of spining). However i have not test driven RAV4 on icey roads and plan to do so tomorrow. Will post my experience. Any one else looked into that? all comments will be appreciated. Thanks
Your civic probably has a lot less power.
Forester isn't front heavy, my guess around 60/40 or thereabouts
Any car on ice will spin, AWD, 4WD, FWD, RWD, doesn't matter.
-mike
The fact that all four wheels spun meant there was to much power and not enough traction.
This post struck me, because I think I posted an almost identical one in 2001 when I first experienced the tail-happiness of my Outback. In retrospect, my Subarus were the most enjoyable cars I have ever owned partly because of their unstopable nature in the snow.
Brian
-juice
my question to the forum remains:
Which is safer on ice, 2WD RAV4 with on demand AWD or forester all time AWD?
If you assume they're the same, i.e. identical tires on both, I'd give the Subaru the edge.
The AWD is full-time, so there's no waiting for a reaction to occur to adjust power after it's already too late, and slipping has already started.
The RAV4 does have stability control on more models, Subaru limits it to the Cross Sports XT, and that might offset Subaru's superior AWD system.
Close call, that's why I go back to the tires.
-juice
My theory: When the front tires on RAV4 slip on a turn, it will tend to go straight instead of turning and thats when AWD kicks in and corrects it. On the other hand with subaru AWD front tires may not be skidding at all on a turn while the power in rear can cause the tail to spin (just like a rear wheal drive. But i am not an expert at all and hoping someone with some insight can through some light on it as i really would like to buy a subaru but the tail spin has thrown me off.
-Frank
If I break traction, purposely, power cycles from front to rear, you can feel it. You can kick the tail out if you try, but just as that starts to happen the AWD shifts the power to the front axle and it pulls you out of the skid.
Basically you won't spin out unless you're trying too hard.
Funny thing is I have a bigger-than-stock rear sway bar, 18mm instead of 13mm. So mine actually has a greater tendency to oversteer than the stock suspension, and it still won't swap ends.
Theory is great, but in practice the Forester is an excellent companion in the snow. Both fun and safe.
-juice
-Frank
-mike
How about RAV4 , is there any such downside to them and in what circumstances a proactive AWD is better to have than reactive one?
Thanks.
If you are driving on more snow than ice, I don't think there is an issue with any vehicle and proactive AWD will keep the car moving and probably perform better. But I would get a car with an ESC type system.
Driving on sheet ice all bets are off for any vehicle under the sun.
-juice
A FWD is prone to understeer and a RWD oversteer on very slippery surfaces. Subaru i felt had a mild potential to oversteer kinda like a RWD. does anyone has any experience with RAV4 V6 2007 on ice. undresteers or oversteers?
I could fit an Evenflo On-my-way stroller lengthwise, something I could not do in a '98 RAV4 or a '98 CR-V. Later CR-Vs got bigger, and you could slide the back seat up to squeeze one in. The 2nd gen RAV4 could still not fit that stroller, but the 3rd one probably can (without the 3rd row, of course).
So try the Forester, take your stroller with you. The cargo floor is pretty deep, so I bet it fits.
-juice
How about which trim to get?
basic model does not have all 4 disk brakes and Limited-slip viscous type Differential (rear) which the xs does but then xs does not have the moonroof which premium model does. But the price goes up considerably from base to premium models.
Columbia edition has the moonroof and dealers are giving a good deal on it but it does not have all 4 disk brakes and viscous type differential - Do theses feature make a big difference?
It will give you the following over base:
Panoramic power sliding-glass moonroof with auto-open/close feature
8-way power adjustable driver's seat with manually adjustable lumbar support
Dual-stage heated front seats
SIRIUS™ satellite radio capability Automatic climate control system
120-watt 4-speaker audio system with 6-disc in-dash CD changer and MP3/WMA player
Auxiliary audio jack for portable media players
Perforated leather-wrapped 3-spoke steering wheel, shifter handle and parking-brake handle
4-wheel disc, ventilated front brakes
Viscous-type limited-slip rear differential
16-inch 8-spoke aluminum-alloy wheels
Heated larger body-color side mirrors with integrated turn signals
Windshield wipers de-icer
Body-color painted door handles
The only addition I added was the powered sub-woofer & tweeters.
I would go for 4 wheel ABS and viscious type differential. It improves handling in inclement/bad weather.
-juice
-juice
The Legacy is fine, but compared to the Forester it's a bit boring.
-juice
Len
-juice
I know that this was touched on earlier (years ago?). I just found this site today, after having an accident in my 2002 RAV4 yesterday. I live just outside of the city and crashed after hitting a patch of blowing snow. Sure, I obviously underestimated the patch of snow, but by the account of the witness and a comment made by the police officer, the accident wouldn't have happened if I was in a vehicle with a lower centre of gravity. The other comment was that he 'heard' that RAVs have a problem with rollovers.
My dog and I are both okay and it could have been much, much, worse.
I wanted to re-introduce this topic to see if others are aware of this issue (if it is one) with the RAVs and to say that, if they write it off, I am certainly looking at the Subaru Forester (I am not sure I can feel safe again in the RAV.)
Any and all comments appreciated. Thanks.
The new RAV4 models have stability control, and that might help prevent something like that from happening.
The exception is a situation where the model is "tripped", i.e. when it hits a curb or something and that triggers the roll, in those cases VSC really won't help at all, unless it intervenes and prevents you from hitting the object, or at least reduces your speed.
Your situation seems to fall under that type of scenario, i.e. it was tripped and the ground was slippery so traction was limited, so let's look at other things.
The new model has a longer wheelbase and weighs more, so it would take more energy and probably higher turning angles to trip the newer models. Not sure about the center of gravity, though, we would need more data. It sure does look tall.
Toyota still registers the RAV4 as a truck, so it doesn't have to meet the roof crush standards that apply to cars (specifically, a car's roof must be able to hold up 150% of the car's own weight).
That doesn't mean it doesn't meet the standards, only that it doesn't have to. Again, we probably need more data to make a judgement on whether or not there is extra protection compared to the 2002 model you drove.
Side curtain air bags are available, and in that situation I'd rather have those, too.
Now, looking at the Forester, Subaru has not yet installed side curtain air bags, but it does have side head/torso air bags that protect the driver's head (but not the rear seat passenger).
The Cross Sports model has stability control, but others don't. I'd recommend that model for you.
The B-pillar Subaru uses is so ridiculously sturdy that firemen actually complained to them that the "jaws of life" tools they have on crash sites was not able to cut through them. If I were to roll a vehicle on its side, I'd certainly want that kind of protection from side intrusion as well as keeping the roof from caving in. I'll post a pic below of the B-pillar in question.
It's naturally much lower to the ground, and more inherently stable. So yes, I think if fear of a roll over is a big concern, the natural choice would be the Subaru.
Please keep in mind that the likelihood is actually very miniscule, and that driving at safe speeds for existing conditions is what's really needed to ultimately guarantee your safety.
-juice
Thanks,
Kyle
Prior models did well on crash tests compared to others in the class at the time, but the 03 model really shined in both NHTSA and IIHS crash tests.
-juice
Here are Edmunds' specs to compare the Forester Sports 2.5 X vs. the RAV4 Sport 4-cyl.
http://www.edmunds.com/apps/nvc/edmunds/VehicleComparison?basestyleid=100832443&- styleid=100777084&maxvehicles=5&refid=&op=3&tab=specsRAV4 excels primarily in rear seat room.
Of course the new Impreza is about to come out, and then the new Forester should arrive next spring. We'll see what Subaru does in terms of size. Lots of people actually want it small, and don't want it to grow.
I wouldn't mind them building 2 wheelbases, like Toyota does, and selling them both here. A SWB sporty one, and a LWB people mover.
-juice
I'm trying to decide between the XT Sport and the Rav4 V6 sport, and am torn between them. I do like the fact that the Rav4 comes with a full size spare. My question is, can I fit a full size spare under the foam compartment that the temp spare is currently in on the XT?
Thanks in advance!
I did this with our 2002 Legacy - put a full size spare and removed the foam insert.
06 was just a face-lift, and the 05s had full size spares of the exact same size.
-juice
It was designed for it and before the 06, they were full size. As part of my trade in deal on my 04, I got my full size spare from my 04 and put it in my 07.
One thing though. There are foam storage things that sit on the tire. They are different for the full size vs the mini spare. The advantage of the mini spare version is that you can store your protective cover in it. YOu can't with the full size spare version. YOu may need to order that piece or go hunting junked ones...
-juice
The 3 row model has a release knob to let the 2nd row go back all the way - a total of 8". So it has room.
Once your kids are in boosters it won't matter, but I can understand why you'd be frustrated. The Forester is the only vehicle left in this class with a wheelbase under 100".
Having said that, the Impreza's new wheelbase is about 104" and I suspect the next Forester will be at least as big. They're in the last model year, so the design is dated and about to be replaced.
how many miles did you have on it?
The bottom line, I'm advertising it for $6500 and only got a couple of calls and no shows so far. I'm dropping the price to $5900 come Friday.