Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Suzuki Grand Vitara vs Subaru Forester vs Hyundai Santa Fe vs Jeep Liberty vs Ford Escape vs Saturn

1858688909196

Comments

  • willysjeepwillysjeep Member Posts: 107
    Does Consumer Reports ever check on customer satisfaction of a product or how well it has held up say after 5 years? I got a diesel Jeep for longevity. Hopefully, the Jeep will give me the hoped for longevity. How is that factored in? It just seems like Jeeps are more rugged than some of the others. You see a lot of old Jeeps on the road.
  • mike_belknapmike_belknap Member Posts: 378
    One major problem with the Chevrolet Equinox, Ford Escape, Hyundai Santa Fe, Mazda Tribute, Mercury Mariner, and regular Saturn Vue, is that they all tipped-up on two wheels during NHTSA's dynamic stability tests. This unstable behavior is both unnecessary and dangerous, so I personally would urge everyone to really think twice before purchasing one of the above models. And besides, there are plenty of other well-rounded utes out there that either have stability control or simply don't have this issue.

    For those who are concerned about crashworthiness, the Suzuki doesn't offer side airbags of any type. According to the results from IIHS tests, a driver of one of these vehicles can expect to receive a broad range of life-threatening injuries in a severe side-impact collision (pickup or SUV at 31-mph). They include serious skull fracture or brain injury, serious neck injury, rib fractures, pelvic fractures, and possibly shoulder fractures.

    Just a little something to think about....

    BTW, Vincent, are you referring to the Caliber sport wagon or the production version of the Nitro concept (MK74). I figured at first you were talking about the latter, but now I'm not so sure since they are both to be built on Jeep platforms (or for the former, a platform to be jointly shared with a Jeep [the "MK49," which will probably be called the Compass after a concept shown a couple of years back]).

    Mike

    image
    image
  • mike_belknapmike_belknap Member Posts: 378
    "Does Consumer Reports ever check on customer satisfaction of a product..."

    Yes, in the annual questionnaire they basically ask that, if you had to do it all over again (i.e., assuming the original set of circumstances, but with the knowledge you have now), would you still purchase the vehicle -- sort of a "20/20 hind-sight" thing (not exactly put like that, but you get the point ;) ). The results are then collected, statistically analyzed, and charted for easy comprehension.
    Now, I have both a paper and an online subscription, so if you'd like me to look anything up for you or anyone else, it would be my pleasure (uh... if I can legally say that on this board.... :confuse: ).

    "...or how well it has held up say after 5 years?"

    Absolutely. Each year they publish data for up to 8 years back, allowing one to see the overall rating for each specific year and which vehicle components are problem hot-spots (of course, many vehicles are totally redesigned before then). After the first year (assuming the sample size of responses is large enough), they are usually able to predict reliability for the [model X's] current generation. The predicted reliability rating is an accumulation of data from all model years of a given generation of vehicle. The depreciation rating, however, is only published after three complete years of data are in.
    Do note, though, that CR's reliability survey asks different types of questions and utilizes different methods than the other "quality studies," such as the ones conducted by J.D.Power & Associates (that's definitely not a "bashing" comment -- I feel that the more information, the better).

    "How is that factored in?"

    Well, this would only effect whether or not a vehicle is "Recommended" or not. To receive Tier-One Recommendation, the model must perform reasonably well in CR's tests, be predicted to have average or better reliability, and not have poor frontal crash test ratings. Tier-Two Recommendation is just a bit tougher to get: the vehicle must receive an impressive score from the IIHS' crash testing program -- including their severe side-impact assessment. Depreciation is independently considered, and not directly factored into any vehicle score.

    Mike
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    Rollover, People need to go to the NHSTA site and actually READ the entire article on potential rollover for these small utes. The percentages are extremely close. Some don't offer any "anti-roll" technology as of yet. They tested only years of vehicles that have this and pitted them against those that don't. Makes you wonder how all the vehicles in that same model (previous years) without this technology would do? However, the percentages are close, some within 1 percentage point. Good article too about how ALL vehicles are much safer than just 5 years ago.
  • mike_belknapmike_belknap Member Posts: 378
    I personally don't put much stock into the "% chance of rollover." As separate bits of information, both the Static Stability Factor (SSF) and dynamic stability test are great comparative tools, but it makes me rather skeptical of their weighting methods when a vehicle that tipped-up onto two wheels during the dynamic test can receive 4 stars as its rollover score and be rated at an 18% chance of rollover (example used: Chevrolet Equinox AWD).

    Mike
  • njswamplandsnjswamplands Member Posts: 1,760
    my nonscientic take is to ignore the % item and to only look at how the vehicle did in the real test ( the toss it around test )
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    To me the Static Stability Factor is an almost meaningless number. There are just too many variables (CG, wheel base, suspension, etc) to come up with a accurate number. The dynamic test on the other hand is a "real world" where the rubber hits the road (literally) test.

    -Frank
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Why? Because tires deform, suspensions get loaded, the physics change.

    A static test is meaningless. Dynamic tests at least carries some meaning.

    -juice
  • thepaulfamilythepaulfamily Member Posts: 4
    Looking at the numbers, the Forester does not look too good on JD Power: Overall quality = 2/5. No thanks!
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    That is one data point and I believe an erroneous data point. The Foresters have long been reliable with quality builds with minimum number of defects. In addition it gets top picks in crash testing and it is high on utility. JD/CR etc will not tell me how my ownership experience will be. I get more valuable information from people who have actually owned one.

    Hence I went and bought one.
  • thepaulfamilythepaulfamily Member Posts: 4
    I agree. However, JDP is based on real data (first 3 months). So if it scores 2/5 in overall quality, there must be something going on - lots of issues in the first 3 months.
  • mike_belknapmike_belknap Member Posts: 378
    On the other hand, Consumer Reports has the largest automotive reliability survey in the world (there were about 810,000 responses last year), and their data suggests that the Subaru Forester is quite dependable. The vehicle rates nearly 50% above the mean (that's statistically much better than average, BTW). What's more, that score was generated from seven model years of data.

    Also remember that JDP's IQS and other studies use very different questions and methods than CR, with different objectives. After all is said and done, they end up measuring very different things. While the CR survey sticks to real problems that the owners are having, the IQS may ask about fuel economy or other relatively extraneous issues. Buyer emotion actually plays a key role in the IQS. (CR does measure owner satisfaction, but these inquiries are asked separate from the “trouble spots” section and are tabulated independently.)

    Now, don't get me wrong: I'm not saying that JDP's IQS results are bogus or irrelevant (because, really, I think the study has its place), but from the information I've been exposed to, I honestly don't see it as a very realistic measure of expected reliability.

    Just my two cents....

    Mike
  • actionjacksonactionjackson Member Posts: 4
    IM STRUGGLING TO DECIDE WHAT TO BUY FOR MY WINTER (SYRACUSE,NY)CAR. WE TRAVEL TO VERMONT , NEW HAMPSHIRE FOR SKI ADVENTURES. PREVIOUS CARS WERE SUBARU LEGACYS BUT NOT ENOUGH LEG ROOM FOR THE OLD MAN.

    I WANT GOOD MILEAGE/RELIABILITY AND THE FORESTERS ARE LOOKING GOOD. WHAT ABOUT THOSE SEATS THOUGH? FEELS LIKE I'M SITTING ON A BENCH AND THAT AWFUL MUSTARD INTERIOR......WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR FEEDBACK.
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    Subaru scoring poorly in the JDP surveys has always been puzzling, especially when taken in context of the bigger picture. I can only surmise that Subaru buyers have extremely high expectations and are very picky about their vehicles. This is certainly backed up by plenty of anecdotal evidence (I.e. the Subaru Owners OCD club!). In any case, while Subarus may indeed have a higher incidence of initial quality problems (hence the mediocre JDP score), IMO the excellent long term reliability forecast (CR) carries much more weight. After all, a dashboard rattle may be extremely annoying in a new car, but it hardly carries the same significance as a transmission that fails after 30k miles :) Oh and any initial quality problems will obviously be covered under warranty while problems that appear after several years of ownership in all likelihood won’t.

    -Frank
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    JD Power also has long term ratings (~3 years) and we have the star ratings on many models here. So there's another data reference point for you.

    Steve, Host
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Subaru was the best brand for MY2004, ahead of Lexus, even. And to top it off the Forester is their most reliable model. The best of the best. That is a fact, literally.

    JDPower isn't measuring reliability, i.e. things gone wrong. For example, the Mini Cooper scored poorly because of a cup holder. The Hummer H2 scored poorly due to gas mileage. Those don't make a car unreliable.

    If you like the Forester, buy it, odds are in terms of reliability, i.e. things gone wrong, you'll encounter few if any.

    You might not like the cup holders. :P

    -juice
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    My '97 Outback has different JD Power ratings for mechanical dependability vs. feature dependability (link).

    The mechanical dependability score in the long term rating (4-5 years) is based on problems reported with the engine, transmission, steering, suspension, and braking systems. That sounds like reliability to me. I'm not sure if any of the cars in this comparision have been rated for the 4-5 year study and several haven't been around long enough to rate.

    The IQC study for the newer cars (there isn't one for my Outback) has a section for creature comforts which is where people ding the cupholders. And if you read the consumer reviews here, people really ding cupholders!

    Steve, Host
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Didn't realize Edmunds linked to that info.

    If you check it out the scores tend to be higher the older it gets, i.e. when the warranty runs out and it really matters.

    -juice
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Unfortunately there are lots of models out there that, for whatever reason, don't have the 4-5 year ratings on them. And sometimes the long term ratings don't trend like you think they should based on the initial 90 day study.

    But it's another data point to go along with CR, MSN and the rest.

    And you gotta love everyone dinging the Hummer for the gas mileage. ;)

    Steve, Host
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Still a useful resource. Thanks. :)

    -juice
  • mnfmnf Member Posts: 405
    Dont forget DAEWOO scored at the top in 2000 it is what it is a paid survey M/F
  • mike_belknapmike_belknap Member Posts: 378
    Hey Matt -- good to see you over here too! I guess you've been a member for a while, eh?

    "Dont forget DAEWOO scored at the top in 2000 it is what it is a paid survey"

    Hmm... makes me wonder how the Suzuki Forenza, Verona, and Chevy Aveo will do in the various studies this year. ;)

    Later,
    Mike
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    There's an explanation for that.

    At first, Daewoo included free service with every car purchase. They were the only ones to offer it at that price level. That made customers quite happy. Plus the cars were new so the big reliability problems had not crept up yet.

    Look now, and customers are paying for their own service plus the cars have deteriorated. In the long run you get what you pay for.

    -juice
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    You never know how a car is going to rate; sometimes you have to look beyond the common wisdom.

    Steve, Host
  • turtoniturtoni Member Posts: 9
    "The Foresters have long been reliable with quality builds with minimum number of defects. In addition it gets top picks in crash testing and it is high on utility."

    that may be but they look like crap.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    That may be but I don't ride on the roof or hood, I drive the car from the inside. :)
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    explain the difference between a Subaru Forester and an Outback?
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    Outback is a little more plush and slightly bigger. I believe it also has the bigger engine. The two vehicles are also derived from different base models, although I don't remember which vehicle was derived from what platform at the moment.
  • mtngalmtngal Member Posts: 1,911
    The Forester is smaller than the Outback. It's based on the Impreza. The Outback is on the Legacy platform. Both have 4 cylinders as their base engines. They both have turbos as engine upgrades (are these the same engine? I don't know), and the Outback also has a 6 cylinder option. They have different trim levels. I've test driven both of them back to back twice. Once I preferred the Outback, the next time I preferred the Forester. Both are excellent vehicles.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Yeah, Forester is based on the Impreza.

    Outback is based on the larger and more upscale Legacy.

    The base 2.5l engine makes 173hp in the Forester and 175hp in the Outback now, due to minor differences in the intake and exhaust, but they are both EJ255 engines. Outback has a PZEV model available in CA which is the most powerful PZEV vehicle in the USA.

    The Forester XT gets the EJ257 engine tuned to make a claimed 230hp now, though conventional wisdom says Subaru is sand bagging big-time because dyno runs for the old 210hp engine yielded about 240-250hp.

    Outback XT gets 250hp from the same engine with higher boost.

    Outback also has an H6 engine option.

    I guess turtoni thinks one single opinion about looks (his own, naturally) is more important than all the testing conducted by IIHS, NHTSA, and CR combined. :P

    Of course nothing else in the class even has a prayer trying to keep up with a Forester XT so don't be surprised when opponents quickly change the subject and try to focus on something subjective, becase they can't win an argument based on objective measures.

    Pathetic, no?

    -juice
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    "prayer trying to keep up with a Forester XT "

    Yeah it's fast all right, especially as the tach hits about 3500....:)
  • turtoniturtoni Member Posts: 9
    http://www.pettersolberg.no/com/default.asp

    picture in there looks pretty nice if you like the racer look.

    turtoni
  • turtoniturtoni Member Posts: 9
    the forester looks like a station wagon. and an ugly one to boot.

    i agree it's an awesome vehicle otherwise but it still looks like a soccer moms car.

    in fact all of the "subies" in my opinion look dated, clunky and flimsy and always have.

    kinda like how saturn cars look. cept maybe when they bolt on the racing stuff.

    turtoni
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    What you say maybe true, but I don't care. I love driving it. It's got the nod of the statistics purveyors even if it is the ugly duckling of the crowd.
  • turtoniturtoni Member Posts: 9
    well thats all that matters if you like it.

    i just wish they'd improve the looks because then i'd probably buy one sometime down the road if they did. it matters to me how the car looks probably above everything else. kinda like a woman. i can put up with some flaws in the personality but if i didnt find her physically attractive it would be a non starter.

    turtoni
  • mtngalmtngal Member Posts: 1,911
    It's what's inside that really counts to me. I kept considering the Element because it's interior was so practical. And talk about dated - I drive a vehicle that hasn't changed it's exterior styling much in 40 years. Looks might get me in the door, but if the content isn't there, forget it.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Flimsy? Look at the IIHS bumper basher tests, the toughest of all is the Forester, it suffers the least damage of any vehicle in its class. The opposite of flimsy.

    Crash tests also prove how tough it is:

    http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/summaries/smsuv_overall_c.htm

    You'll find the Forester is the only small SUV to earn Good ratings in their front and side impact as well as Good ratings in the bumper basher.

    You say one thing, but the opposite is true.

    Every single competitor proves more flimsy in at least one of those 3 tests.

    -juice
  • turtoniturtoni Member Posts: 9
    juice, the key word here is "looks" flimsy. IMO.

    i wouldnt buy a brand new car if i really didnt like it's appearance.

    HTH.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Well, appearances can be deceiving. Some of the truckiest competitors are also the least safe and have the weakest bumpers.

    Also, remember that tough-looking aluminum tube-framed roof rack on the original XTerra? It could only hold 75 lbs. Just about any other rack had more capacity.

    Beauty is more than skin deep. ;)

    -juice
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    Give it up Juice. Some people value looks above all else (as is their preogative) so all the facts and statistics in the world aren't going to sway them. And as great a vehicle as the FXT is, few will argue that it's a beauty queen ;) Besides, a look at Subaru's core demographics show that owners tend to be from occupations that value function over form (ergo engineers and other technical types) :)

    -Frank
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    And there are some people who look for form and function over looks. I'm not saying looks don't matter, I like classy looking cars. But, this car has form/function that I value. I'm not sure what the typical demographic is for the Subie, but I doubt I'm in that category. The Subie no doubt may not have all of the trimmings of the competitors, but given it's strengths I'm overlooking its weaknesses, which are largely subjective in nature. The strengths have everything to do with available cargo area, performance, reliability and safety.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,204
    since i paid the collision bill, in the real world, the crash results for the 'ester, isn't so good. my wife slid into an 'ester with her escape(left rear escape, right rear 'ester). since the rear bumper on the escape was so large, it needed $600 in repairs, the 'ester $1200.
    shortly after getting the repairs done, my wife' escape got hit from behind(in the bumper). $1200 repair, $2500 on the altima. since then, i put a big receiver hitch on the escape. :)
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    It's not about the damage the car suffers, it's about the damage the occupants suffer. :)
  • turtoniturtoni Member Posts: 9
    i thought the subura engines were high performance? ie, very fast. what real function does that serve?

    a forester is high performance salon car with extra boot space. most the subura drivers i've known have been boy racers. they bought the car because it's very fast and fun to drive.

    the ride is lower and the car is smaller than all the other vehicles listed in the topic title. i'd imagine that space is quite high on the list of functionality in fact i'm sure most people dont even think of a forester as an SUV.

    and the jeep is the only car that can really offroad in this topic. hows about that for functionality?

    edmunds lists the chevrolet equinox as *their* most wanted SUV under $25,000 and the escape/tribute comes in secound. the consumers have voted their most wanted as the honda CRV.

    turtoni-

    ps i'll share my tech resume if you'll share yours...
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    "a forester is high performance salon car with extra boot space. most the subura drivers i've known have been boy racers"

    That's a generalization.

    Forester does not have less room then the Liberty. The Liberty is a true offroader. But I can't really say my daily commute takes me down the dirt side of the mountainside. It sucks gas like there is no tomorrow.
  • manamalmanamal Member Posts: 426
    I own a forester ('05) and had an Escape as a rental car. There is no question that the escape is a bigger vehicle. There is also no question that the forester handles better. I prefer the forester to the escape. I like the lower center of gravity: it allows for much better handling. And as for the boy racer, well, I did not buy the tubocharged engine, I am 40 +, and not interested in racing.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Sounds like you overpaid. A Saturn rear-ended my Forester and a whole new bumper was $150 from a wholesaler, and the one on my X doesn't even need to be painted. The Saturn was not driveable. :cry:

    My experience and the IIHS bumper basher results show that you're likely to spend very little repairing a Forester in minor collisions.

    Your Escape got lucky, that's all there is to it. One of the members of a Subaru Crew hit a full-size pickup with his Outback and the pickup suffered a whole bunch more damage, it's all about the angles and what hits what.

    Ground clearance is up for 2006, 7.9" for the turbos and 8.1" for the others. That's about as good as anything else in the class, FWIW.

    -juice
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,204
    back of the escape 'contacted' the 'rester, which needed rear bumper repair, new rear light, rear quarter repair. the body of the escape sits higher. if it had been the front of the escape, the esape repair bill would have been much higher. you don't get lucky twice, except that guy who won the ny lottery twice. ;)
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    So he can afford gas, apparently. ;)

    -juice
  • mtngalmtngal Member Posts: 1,911
    At the beginning of the summer I asked for other solutions for someone I know in Wyoming (who was downsizing from a Suburban).

    They ended up buying a 2000 Outback. It's the first Subaru they have ever owned and they absolutely love it. Their comment is that is easy to maneuver and handles corners/curvy mountain roads better than their Prius, and certainly better than the Suburban or a pickup.

    It's nice to have been right on this one (I kept telling them the Subaru was the best choice).
Sign In or Register to comment.