BMW X3 vs Subaru Forester XT vs Infiniti FX 35 vs Toyota RAV4

daschtick

I like the XT also, but there are several reasons why my wife and I prefer the FX35 more.

First of all, this is going to be my wife's daily driver, and honestly the FX35 (0-60 approx 7.2 seconds) has way more than adequate power for her. She probably won't need a 5.3 second sprint against soccer moms on the way to my daughter's school.

Secondly is features. To her. things like navigation, keyless operation, bi-xenon headlamps, LED tail lamps, rear DVD system for our daughter, side curtain airbags, tire pressure monitoring, outstanding braking and handling are very valuable features.

Next is the availability of an interior color other than black. My wife loves the brick interior, but she'll probably choose beige due to the occasional travel of our yellow labrador. (We've learned to color coordinate with that shedding beast!)

Next is V6 power. There isn't much that matches the smoothness of a Nissan VQ V6. Also, she is used to the feel of a smooth V6 after 8 years of driving our '92 Legend...


Next, unbelievably, is towing. The 3500 pound capacity allows me to tow my 2600 pound boat.

Lastly is style - she loves it! Sure, I agree than the XT has excellent visibility, but she simply doesn't like it, "and if momma's not happy - ain't no one happy"! Nothing more needs to be said here.

And now to price. Like our Acura, I will most likely be purchasing a 2-3 year old car in a while, as I've noticed the "outstanding depreciation" of the FX. It's going to be a used car lover's delight!

njswamplands

does it only stay in your garage? where are the battlemarks

akasrp

btw, do you live in earthquake country? looks like your foundation has a bit o' tilt!

serioulsy, sweet lookin' legend. wish Sube painted the XT in a clean classic black...

srp

ateixeira

Making Momma happy should be #1 on your priorities list. ;-)

Did you put that Legend in a time capsule or something? She looks better than new. In fact, why trade at all?

-juice

daschtick

I bought the car in '95 with 30,000 miles on it, and the photo was taken about 2 years ago, at 120,000 miles, shortly after I joined the "Zaino" cult.

It has been my wife's daily driver for the last 8 years, 6 of which I have been (ab)using it as a tow vehicle for my boat. It has been an outstanding car, but it is nearing 160,000 miles, and we really could use a little more room for my daughter and yellow lab, who currently are sharing the back seat.

ateixeira

Just curious, if Acura treated you so well, why not an MDX?

Are you looking for something that depreciates more so your price is lower?

-juice

daschtick

Actually, the wife likes the MDX a lot also, but at the same time, I think we are just looking for a change, and the Infiniti seems like a fairly safe bet. Also, the Infiniti weighs a little more toward the 'sport' end of the equation, which is very appealing, considering my lust for the G35 Coupe. In fact, on the FX forums that I frequent, there have been several G35 Coupes traded for FXs.

The Legend has been a great compromise for my wife and I, as it offers the luxury, safety, and style that attracts her, yet it still has an athletic feel for a larger sedan, so driving can still be fun, and not just a chore.

I would like to quickly comment on the reliability of this car. After nearly 160,000 miles, I have been more than pleased with the lack of service visits required. Other than CV joints (just recently), front struts, an ignition switch, and brakes, this car never sees the dealership. And when it does, the dealer has given nothing but outstanding service, and been extremely courteous. I cannot say enough good things about my experience.

Lastly, the depreciation factor of the FX is an added benefit for me, just like the icing on the cake.

ateixeira

Yeah, I bet a used MDX wouldn't be much cheaper than a new one. Used Odysseys really hold their value well. A domestic van of the same age is some times $10 grand cheaper!

-juice

daschtick

I hear you on the MDX depreciation (or lack of). I have been casually noticing that there are few for sale for less than $29,000, even though the '01 models barely touched $40,000 fully loaded when new.

overtime1

If you are looking for a bigger vehicle I'd highly recommend the MDX (we own one) but I do agree with the philosophy that the smaller you can get and still meet all your needs - all the better. It sounds like the FX would be a good fit for you and your family.

overtime

ballistic

Not much difference in size between these two. The FX is slightly longer than the MDX, although the latter is a bit wider and taller. As for weight, only a few hundred pounds (roughly 5%) separate them, depending on AWD, engine, etc. Given that their sizes and weights are so similar, I'd opt for the MDX - 3rd-row seating might someday be needed, and it has a half-ton more towing capacity. It also doesn't look as obnoxiously over-styled as the FX.

oregonboy

I also prefer under-stated designs, but many people now seem to prefer more "assertive" (read that obnoxious, if you choose) styling.

james

ballistic

It's a very unwelcome trend. It's one thing to separate from the pack; it's another to sacrifice functionality merely to look different, and when the result is downright unattractive, it's just dumb. The ongoing trend to ridiculously high belt/fenderlines, necessarily sacrificing window height that's important for visibility, is a prime example of counterproductive styling. The mammoth, blunt, upright non-aerodynamic noses such as those on the new Chrysler 300/C and Dodge Magnums (as well as on a number of recent pickup and SUV designs) are another.

If I wanted to drive something that looks more like a Mack or Kenworth truck than a passenger vehicle, I'd buy the real McCoy and not a phony pretender.

ateixeira

They're looking for sales, basically, any way they can get them. They'll probably pitch those models with more sheet metal as safer, see if they can sell more of them.

The FX is popular in my neighborhood, I'm starting to see them all over the place. Of course there is a dealer close by...

-juice

ballistic

They'll probably pitch those models with more sheet metal as safer, see if they can sell more of them.

Gosh, then, let's raise the beltline another foot and leave only a scant 6" of window to look out through.

I'm unalterably committed to the proposition that the safest vehicle is the one that helps you avoid the collision in the first place. Ergo, given a choice between one with crummy outward visibility (but that supposedly, might, maybe deform less in a crash), and another that gives panoramic, unobstructed outward visibility to help avoid the crash, I'll choose the latter every time. And that rules out FXs, H2s, Muranos, Magnums, and all the rest of these high-waisted atrocities.

ballistic

I also find it amusing that some people actually prefer these high-waisted "assertive" designs.

Assertive isn't the word that comes to mind when I see a doddering old man with the waist of his pants belted up around his ribcage. Same goes for cars.

lark6

You don't suppose it's trying to reinforce the sensation of being inside a pillbox, do you?

Ed

njswamplands

showing all

daschtick

"It also doesn't look as obnoxiously over-styled as the FX."

"It's a very unwelcome trend. It's one thing to separate from the pack; it's another to sacrifice functionality merely to look different, and when the result is downright unattractive, it's just dumb."

"that rules out FXs, H2s, Muranos, Magnums, and all the rest of these high-waisted atrocities."

WOW! Don't go ballistic!

If you are so concerned about visibility, get a Pacer!

ballistic

If you are so concerned about visibility, get a Pacer!

The more relevant question is, why aren't you concerned about visibility?

jrock65

FX35 AWD w/ Touring Package (MSRP $39,340) vs.
X3 3.0 Auto w/ Premium Package, Heated Seats, Xenon Adaptive Lights, Premium Sound System (MSRP $43,545)

Here are my general impressions, after driving them both.

Power: FX
Handling: Even
Ride Quality: X3
Exterior Design: FX
Interior Design: X3
Interior Quality: Even
Ergonomics and Comfort: Even
Features: Even
Passenger Space: FX
Cargo Space: X3
Price: FX

Price independent, these cars are about as close to even as you can get. Price dependent, I'd give the nod to the FX.

oregonboy

Aside from the wide b-piller and non-existant passenger side mirror, the AMC Pacer appears to have excellent visability... but I don't think that it competes with the X3 or the FX-35.

zman

Whoa there oregonboy!

My '76 Pacer X (a deep chocolate brown with, I might add, a silky smooth three on the floor) turned more heads than all of these three vehicles combined. A true bellwether that car.

OK, you can all stop laughing now.

Zman

daschtick

"The more relevant question is, why aren't you concerned about visibility?"

I am concerned about visibility, but you've taken it to an extreme. You obviously don't care for "obnoxiously over-styled", "dumb", "high-waisted atrocities" such as the FX, but I like the fact that cars have developed unique personalities, unlike many of the eggs of the 80's and 90's. I even like that the styling of the Forester makes it readily apparent as to what it is.

Your lack of an open mind seems to have severely hindered your "visibility".

ballistic

petew4

right on........ ballistic- if you are looking for stunted style, I see an occasional Yugo hit EBay. Is it about performance & forward thinking? Then wake up to the 21st century. You seem to have an axe to grind with the FX. What's up with that? Not happy with your choices?

ballistic

If narrow, mailslot windows and large blind spots represent what you call "forward thinking", I'll gladly spend my money on new cars that reflect valuable lessons learned in the last century. Performance, style, and forward thinking need not sacrifice functionality and safety.

njswamplands

njswamplands

njswamplands

ballistic

The view through a periscope is not bad, especially when it frames a Soviet warship that has no idea you're there.

p0926

The FX undeniably sacrifices rearward visibility for the sake of style (why else would it come with a school bus-like rearview camera?). But while the FX's styling does nothing for me personally (I must be an old fuddy duddy), I acknowledge that it represents cutting edge fashion to others and I certainly respect their right to choose form over function.

-Frank P.

daschtick

I have yet to drive an X3, but I find your assessment of the X3 ride characteristics to be intersting, especially since C&D seemed to really hate the ride, but to be fair, they didn't care for the FX45 ride all that much either.

I did however agree with the conclusion in the C&D article, that a 330xi wagon would be better solution, but unfortunately, the wagon only comes with the 2.5, which is a little weak for an AWD wagon.

I've driven both the FX35 and FX45, and I found both rides very acceptable, but I have always have driven sporty cars that never were known for smooth rides.

I will be looking at the X3 at the auto show in a few weeks, and depending on my initial impressions, perhaps I'll look a little further after that.

njswamplands

bankeizen

Someone said; I certainly respect their right to choose form over function.

If their limited visibility causes them to run into you if you are in their enormous blindspots, you might want to reconsider.

For me the lack of rearward visibity was almost 100% responsible for eliminating the FX whcih drove comparably to the the Cay and X-5 and would have been an excellent value. (I had an order in for a X-5 4.4 which I decided to cancel because of reliability problems BMW was having.)

Styling is way down on my priority list but when it presents unsafe conditions it is a major negative.

For what it is worth I don't much care for the FX (silly looking), X-5 (nothing much looks), SRX (a big box) or Cay (also nothing much looks). My favorite is the Volvo XC-90 which is not a possibility due to performance and thus safety concerns. I also like the 4Runner and Grand Cherokee in terms of styling. But basically I do not much care as long as a car meets my other criteria.

rsholland

Here's the new JDM Forester STi, with a Babblefished translation of the Japanese Subie site. This is the first use of a 2.5 turbo in any JDM Subie.

http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/tr?doit=done&urltext- - - =http%3A%2F%2Fwww.subaru.co.jp%2Fforester%2Fstiversion%2Findex.ht- - - ml&lp=ja_en

Bob

petewat3

I've been driving (& thoroughly enjoying) an FX45 for 7 months & there is no visibility issue or blind spot that properly adjusted mirrors don't mitigate. If you are used to driving a half-glass box and test an FX, it will naturally seem that vision is constricted but that doesn't mean it's a safety issue - it isn't.

bankeizen

Test drove the FX five times (really wanted to get it) but could never feel comfortable with vision. No amount of mirror adjustment will give me a clear distant view through the rear window which every other vehicle afforded (so I could telll what was approaching). And while I use mirrors I prefer to have the option of direct sighting. For me, this is regretable because the FX is an excellent vehicle in every other respect and I would have purchased it. .

rickrover

Here's a picture of the XT STi



I saw an ad for the current XT that said " Your 350Z just got smoked by a family of 5 and a dog - Forester XT 0-60 in 5.3 seconds"

corkfish

Hopefully, they'll wait at least a couple of years before they bring it here and/or will make it a $30,000 plus car ( I'll never pay over $30K!). Otherwise, I'm in trouble. Anyone want to buy my XT with 4500 babied miles?

rickrover

The article that goes with that picture basically says all the bits that go into the Impreza STi are in the Forester, 300 HP 2.5, 6 speed, adjustable center diff, Xenon's, intercooler sprayer, Recaros and Brembo brakes, etc.. Can't imagine they'd price it higher than the $32k Impreza STi.

Anyone want a nice low milage 04 Impreza STi - 4,200 miles - :-)

designman

Convertible rear top would make this baby perfect. I'll take mine in silver. And Audi with their $54k S4 wagon can officially KMA.

ballistic

I agree with your restricted-vision comments completely. Outward visibility is one of those things you can't have too much of, which is another way of saying that more is always better and less is always worse. Any vehicle that sacrifices visibility in favor of phony, nonfunctional "style" treatments is instantly off my list. That would include the high-beltline FX, the X3 with its pointless kicked-up fenderline in the important rear-quarter area, the Murano for the same reason, and so forth. It also would include any vehicle with limo-dark tinted film on any of the glass except sunroof.

Really talented automotive designers have no difficulty providing good looks and good functionality. Anything else is lame.

rsholland

unfortunately it's often the marketing people, and not the designers, who have the final say.

I'm a firm believer in: "The customer is NOT always right!" Just because the customer wants it, doesn't mean it right or good. Customers are often their own worst enemy.

Bob

ateixeira

I find it rather amusing that some folks here have said the Forester is all about power, but if you look at the criteria jrock65 came up with, Forester leads in 4 of them - power, ride, cargo space, and price.

So it's not a one trick pony after all.

-juice

ballistic

Customers are often their own worst enemy.

Especially when they behave like lemmings, stampeding after the latest contra-functional styling gimmicks.

ballistic

So it's not a one trick pony after all.

More like that untouchable stud, Secretariat.

ateixeira

Well, let's call it Sea Biscuit. It wins races but still gets no respect from expensive pure breeds.

This just in - the Forester STi actually has not "just" 300hp, it's actually 355hp! 6 speed and HIDs, too.

X3 would need an M version to deal with that one.

-juice

rsholland

I saw Frank post that. Is that correct though? It says 265 PS, does that convert to 355 HP?

Bob

njswamplands

as the movie cannonball run says as the driver rips off his rear view mirror... "whatsa behind me donta maka any difference"