Suzuki Grand Vitara vs Toyota RAV4

manifoldmanifold Member Posts: 57
edited March 2014 in Suzuki
Which one do you like and why?


  • manifoldmanifold Member Posts: 57


  • manifoldmanifold Member Posts: 57


  • erk5erk5 Member Posts: 21
    Though it's a shame how much it has grown. A huge part of its success was the compact size.
  • barlobarlo Member Posts: 23
    I personally like the flow of the Grand Vitara dash board and console better as compared to the chopped up look of the Rav.
  • hondaconvert1hondaconvert1 Member Posts: 60
    All I know for sure is that I am getting rid of my 05 Odyssey with multi issues and going after the cute-ute 06 RAV4 for SURE, never again HONDA.... nothing can beat TOYOTA quality!!!
  • csandstecsandste Member Posts: 1,866
    the mid-nineties Camry wagon.
  • manifoldmanifold Member Posts: 57
    I think they made a good move increasing the size and redesigning the look. Its not your girlie SUV anymore :P . It looks more manly so to speak. I like the new one better than the old.
  • hansiennahansienna Member Posts: 2,312
    Agree on quality issue. The Grand Vitara may look nicer but Suzuki does not measure up to Toyota for quality. ;)
    I personally think Toyota has rather ugly exterior styling ( in any size vehicle) but feel the Sienna, Camry, and Avalon have attractive interiors. I do NOT like the interior appearance of the 06 RAV4.
    BTW, why would you go with a RAV4 instead of a Sienna if you currently own an Odyssey? :confuse:
  • hondaconvert1hondaconvert1 Member Posts: 60
    I am convinced that all these huge vans/mini-navs will have forever the issue of bulkiness along with rattles, clangs and all kind of weird noises... there is no solution around... it is just the fact of big huge vehicle effect of all kind of noises. I am tired of dealing with all these issues and of course the cheap quality of HONDA vehicles... I also never liked big vehicles but just enough size to accomodate and take care of the vehicle as needed and I believe the 06 RAV4 is the one, although I am 6'5'' tall still I am not concerned that it will fit me just fine. I used to have a 1999 4Runner and I believe the front space should be the same or more with 06 RAV4...

    Also the MPG it will be better than any minivan out there and anything smaller than a minivan will fit better in the garage...
  • manifoldmanifold Member Posts: 57
    I dont think Suzuki would sell many cars if they had quality issues. Suzuki has been the number one seller in Japan for the last six consecutive years. They also sell something like 2 million vehicles globally a year. In fact, in a year, they build more cars compared to Mazda, Subaru, Isuzu and Porsche. Theyre not as popular here in the states, but sell quite well outside.
  • hansiennahansienna Member Posts: 2,312
    Good reason. We like our minivan as it is the smallest vehicle that will fill our needs. ;)
    We go on 3 long trips a year and take 1 grandchild or 1 daughter, son-in-law, and their 2 children.
    If we did not go on long trips, a RAV4 or CR-V would be ideal since we do not like the low seating in modern sedans or station wagons.
    As you well stated, the RAV4 gets better gas mileage and will fit better in a garage than the Sienna or Ody.
  • leclercleclerc Member Posts: 2
    Well you have all seen the Grand Vitara now so what is the problem? For the money you are getting the best there is out there.The Grand Vitatra was voted the best Suv under $40,000 by TSN'S Motoring, And Voted Best New SUV by AJAC and Canadian Driver says it is a must see for anyone considering a compact SUV. So check them out you will be pleasantly surprised!
  • petlpetl Member Posts: 610
    Information on how the AJAC awards works. It only includes new vehicles (not all vehicles available in each class). Also, since the 2006 RAV had not been released yet, it was not included in the evaluation process. I'm sure the Grand Vitara is a good vehicle, but it was not compared to or evaluated against every vehicle available in its class. Therefore, the process is flawed and a little misleading.
  • alrodalrod Member Posts: 1
    Drove the Rav4 and bought the Suzuki Grand Vitara. I like the styling much better. I went with the leather seats, sunroof, 4WD and basically maxed the car out. The quality on the Toyota is a little better, but this puppy is a little bigger and is just a lot more fun. HUGE improvements over previous years models which kept Suzuki off my shopping list before.
  • campdraftycampdrafty Member Posts: 10
    Glad to see your post. We're going to start test driving vehicles - chiefly the new Grand Vitara and the new Rav. Have previously owned a '95 Sidekick and currently own a '00 Grand Vitara. Both Suzuki vehicles have proven extremely reliable and functional - great to drive both in the city and offroad (have a camp in the mountains). Love the new GV design, both inside and outside. Not crazy at all about the Rav's interior or exterior, but am test driving the vehicle based on reports on Toyota's quality. I hope to stay with Suzuki because of our past experience!
  • xostnotxostnot Member Posts: 232
    We like to hear that! (Surely the Rav4 has more cargo room, though.) If you want to stir up trouble, just post your choice on a Rav4 discussion site.
  • campdraftycampdrafty Member Posts: 10
    lol!!! I thought about that! I know that most Toyota owners are extremely loyal to their brand too. Still, when my husband and I visited the car show here in Pgh when it came to town, we checked out both the GV and the Rav. The GV looked great and felt very comfortable inside. We didn't get a good feeling at all inside the Rav - felt "cramped".
    Question - and sorry if I've missed a previous post about this - we've been reading a lot on edmunds about both vehicles - does anyone know what the engine size will be in the '07 GVs? My '00 GV is a 2.5l engine (I think), and the new ones are 2.7l. I've never had a problem with the engine size in my current gv, but it seems to be a serious topic among new gv owners. Any answers appreciated.
  • xostnotxostnot Member Posts: 232
    The horsepower race fans are hoping Suzuki puts the XL7's 3.6L V6 in the GV for '07. Others are hoping Suzuki makes available the diesel available in it outside North America. My guess is they will stay with the 2.7, which has been used in the >06 XL-7. Outside the insiders, no one really seems to know yet.
  • avrguy73avrguy73 Member Posts: 26
    There is no way that the suzuki is bigger. The Suzuki looks small and low. And it is.
  • campdraftycampdrafty Member Posts: 10
    Actually, they're now somewhat similar. Did a comparison on Edmunds:

    Height on Suzuki - 66.7 in.
    Height on Rav - 66.3 in.

    Length on Suzuki - 176 in.
    Length on Rav - 181.1 in.

    Width on Suzuki - 71.3 in.
    Width on Rav - 71.5 in.

    Ground clearance on Suzuki - 7.9 in.
    Ground clearance on Rav - 7.5 in.

    Given all these similar dimensions, it is amazing that the Rav has a much bigger cargo capacity. It is longer, though, and their seats do fold down better.
  • xostnotxostnot Member Posts: 232
    The '06 GV has really been taking in on the chin for poor mileage and a crude V6 from many corners, especially Rav4 fans. The epa rating for the GV is 30mpg CDN, while the V6 Rav4 is rated at 36mpg.

    Well, the other day I was driving on a flat, straight road, with no traffic to draft, and no wind. I waited until I was holding the speed steady, with the mileage indicator varying by no more than plus or minus .1 l/100km. At 110 kph, the GV was getting 9.8 l/100km, and at 100kph it was getting 9.0 l/100km. So I was thinking that the epa rating probably is for more like a simulated speed of 80kph, not 100. I slowed to 80, waited for the throttle to settle out, and checked the reading. 8 l/100km. That's 36mpg using the Canadian/Imperial gallon. It would be 15% less for the US gallon.

    It has just over 5000 km on it now. When it had 200km on it, driving at 110kph, on flat and level, with no wind, but in winter and with the roof rack crossbars and 5 pairs of skis on the rack, and the tires underinflated, it settled at 11.8 l/100km.

    So it appears to me that these results are consistent, and better than the epa rating now that it's nominally broken in, in warm air, with nothing on the roof, and with the tires inflated to the spec 32lb. pressure.

    AND, if this turns out to be typical, then it means all the criticism the GV has been getting, much of it credited to a crude engine, is simply wrong. And given the GV is always in AWD, it means it's actually doing better than Toyota's much-vaunted sophisticated engine and superior engineering.

    This is definitely worth keeping an eye on.
  • justflooritjustfloorit Member Posts: 8
    Why do so many GV owners have to validate their vehicle purchase decision by posting on a RAV4 board? :confuse: For me, the GV's underpowered V6 and fuel economy just don't cut it. You love the GV? Good for you! Now move on! You're not getting any admiration or buyer's remorse form THIS satisfied RAV4 owner. :D
  • campdraftycampdrafty Member Posts: 10
    The GV vs. RAV board shows up on BOTH the Suzuki and Toyota boards, that's why. And after buying my third Suzuki GV - and after test driving both the GV and the Rav - this was a purchase that I didn't have to justify - it was simply a no-brainer. :)
  • thecatthecat Member Posts: 535
    it was simply a no-brainer

    Well the implication here is that if you bought a RAV you don't have a brain. I take ubbrage at that suggestion.

    I'm glad you like your GV and you're intitled to your opinion. My experience wasn't the same as yours. I found the GV's engine to be unrefined by comparison to the V6 RAV. Gas mileage was another consideration ... and then there is the resale value issue. So, as it turns out it is a "brainer" after all.
  • campdraftycampdrafty Member Posts: 10
    it was simply a no-brainer . . .

    For me. That statement was made by me and applied to me only. That you took it as "ubbrage" (did you mean "umbrage"?) was your choice.

    As for resale - yes, the resale on the Rav should be worth more (then again, who knows how the new GVs will be on resale - should be interesting and hope it's more than past models) - but the thousands I saved on the purchase price of the GV (compared to what I would have paid for a Rav) may make up for it. Mileage is also a consideration, but from what I've read on various forums, including ravs, some people haven't been getting the mileage they should. Haven't tested the mileage on my new GV yet. :)
  • bm000092bm000092 Member Posts: 70
    With my GV, on average during winter time (when it was below zero), I was getting 20/21 mpg. Now on summer time my average is 23/25 mpg. This is base roughly on 70% city and 30% highway. When I do highway only, running at 70 mph, I'm doing 30 mpg.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    This is a comparison board so the whole point is to point out the pros and cons of the two rigs (in a civil manner of course :shades:).

    Check the title again. ;)

    Steve, Host
  • xostnotxostnot Member Posts: 232
    Posts on the Rav4 vs GV topic on very well cover the reliabilty, resale value, quality and mileage issues. No need to repeat them, except to counter those who parrot the claims of Rav4 superiority.

    I think it's very fair to say, given my post above, and others, that the relative mileage advantage of the Rav4 is being seriously challenged.

    I'd also say that if the GV had more soundproofing, and softer suspension, it would seem just as "refined" as the Rav. It's very simple and cheap to achieve that impression. I thoroughly sound insulated an old cheap car, and afterward it seemed vastly more "refined".

    Suzuki should put out a version that matches the Rav4 for off-road incompetence and interior decibel levels, and get the mileage ratings corrected. Maybe then a few of those Rav4 buyers would be smart enough to pass on the Rav4's Toyota cachet, and pocket up to $10,000.

    I say all this without taking cabbage at anyone.
  • xostnotxostnot Member Posts: 232
    Is there some way to fix the Consumer Rating scores at the top of this topic to reflect the '06 GV and Rav4's? Instead of the '05 Rav4 and older GV's. I would imagine everyone's interested in the scores for the current models.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    That issue has been on the bug list for a while. Seems like 2006 is the current model year for both the GV and RAV4 (which is sometimes an issue during the model changeovers). I'll check on it again.

    Steve, Host
  • xostnotxostnot Member Posts: 232
    Somewhere today, I saw rollover ratings for many 2006 vehicles. I think it was on the NHTSA site. The Rav4 did better than the GV by one or two percentage points. The cheering for the Rav4 should be muted by the fact that's not a big difference, and one would expect the GV to have done worse since it has a higher ride height. If this is the reason for the GV's marginally worse score, the extra clearance has not hurt the stability as much as one might expect.

    I went to the NHTSA's vehicle consumer complaints site and looked up the 2006 GV and the 2006 Rav4. You can do this yourself, here:

    Yes, the Rav4 outsells the GV by 4 or 5-to-1, but the GV has been on the roads 4-6 months longer. The GV has three complaints, of which one is a duplicate, while the Rav4 has 10. Some of those ten are, frankly, frightening. Like the claims of uncontrolled acceleration. We won't know for sure for years which is designed and built better, but comparing the data collected so far on that site does not support claims of Rav4 superiority, at any price.
  • thecatthecat Member Posts: 535
    the Rav4 outsells the GV by 4 or 5-to-1, but the GV has been on the roads 4-6 months longer. The GV has three complaints, of which one is a duplicate, while the Rav4 has 10.

    Excuse me, I wasn't a statistics major but if we multiply the # of complaints of the GV by the factor (4-5) of RAV sales over the GV we then arrive at a statistical "level playing field" of 12-15 complaints. That would be a 20-50% increase over the complaints of the RAV ... right?
  • xostnotxostnot Member Posts: 232
    Well, sort of, and I did consider that. Certainly the more copies sold, the more problems you'd expect to find, all else being equal. But for a mass produced product, you'd expect certain problems to appear repeatedly, rather than an endless variety of problems. So I think you have to factor in the variety of problems reported, and the Rav4 is certainly far in the lead as far as variety reported goes.

    At the same time, the GV has had more time to reveal problems, so I thought it fair to let the two considerations cancel each other out and not get into all that. But now I've had to:-)

    By no means is this scientific, since it's a small sample, and there is no control over anything. Perhaps RAv4 owners are fussier, or treat their vehicles more roughly. Who knows? It's a good place to apply Occam's Razor.
  • tidestertidester Member Posts: 10,059
    Who knows? It's a good place to apply Occam's Razor.

    Unfortunately, even Occam is stymied when the statistics are invalid - i.e. insufficient data.

    tidester, host
  • andrelaplumeandrelaplume Member Posts: 934
    You are fussier when pay more and have higher expectations.
  • picard12picard12 Member Posts: 55
    Does anyone notice cabin noise level of both SUV?

    Which SUV has more quiet interior?
    Consumer report indicated the new GV has noisier engine and poor sound insulation compare to RAV 4 V6 model.

    Can anyone confirm Consumer report results?
  • bm000092bm000092 Member Posts: 70
    I have a 2006 GV V6, haven't try the RAV4, it didn't suit my needs. Personnaly I don't consider the GV as noisy and I'm really happy with it.
    I would not choose a new car based on the interior noise level. However, if I follow your idea, that you consider a RAV4, then you don't really need a true 4x4, so I would go with the Santa Fee, which is the most confortable and quieter of all of them, based on all the comparaision I read about all the new SUV since last year.
  • picard12picard12 Member Posts: 55
    I like all 3 models suv but my major decision will be base on interior noise level, engine noise output. My hearing is damaged thus I have to protect my ear drums. I can't risk more exposure to loud noise on long trip.

    I have to test drive all 3 models to make decision. I just want more feedback from everyone so I have more info.
  • bm000092bm000092 Member Posts: 70
    Then the Santa Fee would fill your needs, regards.
  • drxsushimondrxsushimon Member Posts: 3
    Sure, a Rav4 would fit most of your needs, according to the Toyota site. But on their site, when you compare the Rav4 to the GV like over half GVs stuff is "not available" Yeah the Rav4 has served its purpose through the years as a small tiny suv, and changing its looks in 06, the same year as GVs new bold look. But if you do look at the prices and all the standard equipment on the GV its sure is hard to beat. Plus if you compared all base models GV has 185 over the 166 the base engine of a Rav4 supplies. Gv's warranty also overcomes Toyotas 60month 60,000mile warranty with their 84month 100,000mile warranty. The quietness of the cabin is hard for me to compare, since i dont have a Rav4, but the only thing i hear with my windows up is that zippy engine that doesn't really sound like its pistons pounding around but more like a zzzzzzzzz or something. I don't think you can trust in their comparisons since it is all about marketing their car to be better. And the GV has this kick [non-permissible content removed] 4x4 system that is sure to out preform the Rav4 off the road. But if you want to stick out from the hundreds of Rav4s on the road, the bold/stone/angry looking GV with its outstanding 4x4 capabilities is sure to catch someones eye on and off the road. And i dont want to brag but i did drag race this Rav4 on the street, and blew it away ;)
This discussion has been closed.