Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Honda CR-V, Toyota RAV4 or Subaru Forester?
This discussion has been closed.
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
No, on secondary roads north of Santa Fe. The last 1/3 of the tank was at 80 MPH on I-25.
Ok one last explanation with another step more detail to help you understand my last post. First a brief explanation of closed loop fuel control. The most complete combustion occurs at a certain air to fuel ratio (14.7:1). Run richer (more fuel) or leaner (more air) and you wont use fuel most efficiently to generate energy. When a car is running at a constant light load (say on level ground going 60mph) it governs the amount of fuel injected partially by premade tables and equations which correlate the amount of air going into the engine (via MAF data) to the length of time fuel will be injected (Injector duty cycle) and partially by fine tuning with the actual measured ratio of air to fuel via the O2 sensor. If the voltage in the O2 sensor goes up then it is detecting to rich a fuel mixture and it tells the car to decrease the injector duty cycle a little bit. If it is too low voltage then it will say to increase the injector duty cycles for a bit. This way the car can achieve the great 14.7:1 ratio.
Ok but wait there is more! You can get 1/2 the mpg and still maintain the ratio, that is in most cars you could have a rated highway mpg of say 20mpg but get only 10mpg yet still have perfect control via the closed loop operation! How? will get to that but first another side track. If the amount of fuel injected is proportional to the amount of air coming into the engine then what controls the amount of air coming in? The throttle does (along with engine rpm at any given moment). So lets say you are cruising down the highway in fifth gear at 2000rpm and the throttle 1/3 of the way open. Next you downshift to third gear with the throttle still 1/3 of the way open. What happens? You slow down. But if you downshift to third gear and press in the throttle to say 1/2 (amount of air going through is not linear with degree of throttle opening) you may maintain the same speed. Ignoring the fact that your car likely switched to open loop fuel management briefly then equilibriated back to closed loop operation, you will burn 2X the fuel and 2X the air will be going through your engine, and you will have 2X the amount of exhaust, yet you are going the same speed and have that same great 14.7:1 ratio. Where does that extra energy go? Because it dose not take any more energy to move the car at the same speed no more of it is translated to mechanical energy (other then a little more internal friction in the engine from turning at higher rpm). By percentage the same amount goes out the exhaust (or twice the amount of energy measured by absolute amount). However the radiator now absorbs more energy by % and also more by absolute amount. In other words its flying out the back side of the radiator as heated outside air. Hope this clears it all up.
As far as potential energy is concerned, the only energy that is not converted is actually the unburned fuel going to the cat converter. It may not all be usable mechanical kinetic energy (most of it is not) but the laws of thermodynamics really dont change, if you stick a car inside a big enough closed insulated container and measured the air temp you would see total energy is maintained.
tidester, host
-juice
Unless of course you like 2 or 3 different vehicles equally, & Premium Gas might be the deciding factor in a purchase(?). Still, cars are so expensive to buy, maintain, insure, depreciate, etc. that just the diff. on insurance rates or depreciation or cost of repairs between diff. cars would probably far outweigh the cost diff. between Premium Gas & regular. IMO.
Still, I'm learning that the need for Premium Gas is some kind of Huge Taboo for some people.....& there's no use trying to debate the real $$ effect.....
The taboo must run in families. :P
But turbo cars command a premium price.
And there is probably a premium on the insurance premium, for increased sticker price, and higher risk of theft.
Also they are seen as more of a performance vehicle, which might up the ante.
It adds up.
The vehicles in this CR-V / RAV4 / Forester group are by and large appealing as economy vehicles.
A turbo / performance version is really another category.
Apples and oranges.
Thanks.
I prefer cars that can use either grade. I had a 2002 Honda Odyssey that had 210 HP with regular and 240 with premium. It was very interesting; the shift points changed when premium was used, and I got slightly better HP. However, 210 was sufficient for my needs, and the slightly greater MPG (about 1-2 MPG) did not offset the 30 or so cents per gallon the premium cost.
But it was nice to be able to use Premium on the occasional trip to get more HP.
I agree with everything you said, but both Toyota and Subaru offer economical 4 cylinder models.
Note that Honda's turbo CR-V is basically the RD-X, and that model drinks premium fuel, too.
Like I said, you gotta pay to play. Enthusiasts are usually willing to pay more to get the extra power and performance. Better to be happy with a purchase and spend a bit more, vs. spend less and feel buyer's remorse.
It's up to you, for many the economical normally aspirated 4 bangers are best.
-juice
And there is probably a premium on the insurance premium, for increased sticker price, and higher risk of theft. - Usually the more a vehicle costs the higher the insurance is going to be but theft risk is far more model specific. I.e. a turbo Porsche is obviously a much higher theft risk than a Subaru turbo anything
Also they are seen as more of a performance vehicle, which might up the ante. - Again same scenario as the theft risk, a turbo in a sports car is going to be viewed as far more performace oriented.
-Frank
besides, they just couldn't have three hondas take up the five slots (the pilot was named best large SUV and odyssey was named best minivan).
-Frank
true, except for the fact that the CRV and RAV4 are practically identical in size (the RAV4 is 3.2" longer but that's probably all spare tire). i was considering the RAV4 with 3rd row until i actually saw one with that option...it is so small and cramped, i honestly cannot fathom how it would be useful for anything other than an emergency.
Mileage was very nearly a match for the Vue Greenline, so GM has some work to do. The Escape hybrid was the only one that was significantly more fuel efficient.
They only tested newer models so the Subaru Forester wasn't included.
I like the RAV4 but see plenty of room for improvement - visibility is poor, the rear door still opens the wrong way, and the AWD is just part-time. There's no full size spare, either.
It has many strong points but it's far, far from perfect.
-juice
It's not a magazine but Motorweek...
What do they say at the beginning? Something like "television's original automobile newsmagazine" I've watched for 20 years but I'm sure I messed that up
It was a pretty good episode, lots of vehicles were covered. Not a lot of detail on any one, but enough that they got their opinions across.
I met John Davis at the NY Auto Show 2 years ago. You never forget his voice, he sounds the same even speaking casually.
I know his boss - neighbor of mine, and was invited to the MotorWeek awards show at the Chicago Auto Show, VIP passes for the event plus the show itself.
I really wanted to go but I'd have to pay the air fare plus take time off work, though my friend even offered to share his room. It was close but since no new major debuts that I'm interested in are schedule I passed, though I may go next year if he goes again.
Plus, I've never been to Chicago.
-juice
Big place... windy.. good pizza.. Wrigley Field..
See.. now you don't have to go..
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
-juice
juice, i'm almost positive the spare on the RAV4 is full-size. i can't imagine why on earth they'd mount a spacesaver spare on the tailgate like that.
edit: i just checked the toyota website and the spare is indeed full-size on all three trim levels.
Our Legacy had a donut and I actually replaced it with a proper spare tire on a spare rim I had.
-juice
And for kyfdx, the windy thing is really not related to weather. It goes back to a New Yorker's comment about Chicago politicians.
I'm ashamed to say I haven't been to the Auto Show in person in a long time. Too crowded. But if I had VIP access that would be different.
I bet most models there have AWD. :shades:
I got a chance to drive on my snow tires (with AWD) today, and boy do they help. I didn't slip at all. It's almost too safe, and takes all the fun out of controlled wheelspin.
-juice
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
I got 'em for free. Someone gave a set to Bob Holland when they traded in their Forester.
Then Bob found he wasn't using them. He knew I drove to work in any weather, so he offered them to me.
They're definitely for snow/ice, and not a performance oriented tire. Grip seems excellent so far. The all seasons would have let me wag the tail on the turns I took, but not these. Kinda made the ride a bit boring.
-juice
Since we got 5" yesterday, it is on my mind..
Of course, I didn't have any trouble with just my crappy old Touring TA..
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Bob
-juice
Bob
Is there one is this group that is close, close to perfect?
I found the cargo capacities interesting, with the CR-V, RAV4 and (I think) the Mitsubishi easily beating the others by a wide margin. The Escape Hybrid (which they said has as much cargo space as an Explorer) had 11% less space than the 'V. Also the MPG results were worth noting. Some were pretty low.
The "perfect" car will never be built since the definition of what equals perfect is different depending on who you ask. It may be possible but I seriously doubt you could even build the "perfect" car for just one person.
Having said that, for a particular individual, a given model will be closer to the definition of perfect than others. For me, I think the Forester XT is as close to perfect as I can realistically expect to find. Of course I readily admit that for many, the Forester is far from the best choice as their primary means of transportation.
-Frank
Generally speaking, this class, compact car-based SUVs, is not really mature yet.
If you look at the minivan class, for instance, the formula is mature, you can get competent vans from many sources. Honda, Toyota, even Kia and Hyundai have all the basics down for the minivan formula:
* magic split fold 3rd row
* 2nd row windows that roll down
* a powerful V6 with good fuel efficiency
* enough power options to do everything but your taxes
And I hear they're working on that last one.
The car-based compact SUVs have only been around since 1996, so it's a decade young. They're still sorting out the formula, to be honest, so I think we'll continue to see significant innovation and improvements over the next generation or so.
Every single one of these have room for improvement.
-juice
One reason for the differences is that the vehicle's mission isn't as clear cut... so there are a lot of interpretations of what a small crossover SUV should be. IMHO, that is a good thing...
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Guess you could call the Mazda5 a van, depending on your angle. Mazda just hasn't brought over the 7 seat model yet, nor have they offered power doors. Those exist in the JDM model.
Also, no AWD (which only a few vans offer anyway), no V6.
-juice
The Xterra was originally considered a compact SUV, but the truckish nature and shrunken pick-up platform really pushed it outside the realm of the compacts. With the redesign, Nissan made it what it truly is... an inexpensive mid-size. Now we are getting the Rogue.
The Santa Fe was another. Although inexpensive, it was really a better match for the Highlander and Murano. With its redesign the Santa Fe moved up and the Tucson replaced it.
Vehicles like the Suzuki Sidekick have been taken off the market.
We don't see many of those variations anymore. So, I think it's fair to say the segment is becoming more clearly defined. Even though it isn't there, yet.
* large displacement 4 cylinder engine, optional V6
* mpg in the 20s (high teends for V6s)
* unibody platform
* 4 wheel indy suspension
* FWD or AWD choices
* price range around $20 all the way up to $30k
* 5 seats, 5+2 optional on some
That pretty much describes the segment, IMO.
-juice
(hp + torque) * mpg * (cargo space) * (IIHS crash test stars) / weight?
Sure, an FXT isn't going to win a drag race with a 911, but it's far more practical than a 911 on a Home Depot run. It burns fuel (and premium at that) at twice the rate of a Prius, but has the acceleration for avoidance and is far more fun to fling around. Of course, (dis-)liking a vehicle is subjective, rather than the above objective formula. And "flingability" is about as subjective as it gets...
Disclaimer: as one whose only car is an FXT, I may be a bit biased.
Interesting aside: the runner-up in our car-shopping sweepstakes was the Prius, but my wife and I couldn't bring ourselves not to have a manual transmission...
:shades: Nice. That's a good features-by-the-pound approach. But I've got a feeling most buyers would place all those criteria over price rather than weight.
For my part, I'd add that most new vehicles seems to be targeting the CR-V for size. Smaller models have not done as well in terms of sales and larger models seem to be moving up to mid-size. 100 cu.ft. of interior space seems to be where new models are hovering.
I actually tried to calculate what I called "value" based on several criteria that were important to me at the time.
I still have the Excel spreadsheet, the formula was:
(HP * Torque * (city+hwy mpg/2) * tank capacity) / (weight * price / 550)
The 550 was just a constant that brought all the cars in the range of around 50 to 100. The price was the market price at the time at no-haggle dealers, with certain required equipment (A/C, ABS, AWD, etc).
These 3 were on my short list, so it was CR-V 56, RAV4 58, Forester 98.
Subaru did well with a slightly bigger gas tank, less weight, a lot more HP at the time, and more torque.
That is not by any means why I chose the Forester, but it helped reinforce my decision.
I bet if you repeat the same exercise today, it would be a lot closer.
Also, I didn't factor interior room, and perhaps should have. Anything was a big step up from the Escort GT I had before. That would have helped the CR-V somewhat.
-juice
Juice, you have way too much time on your hands... :surprise:
Of course now my formula has changed, it's:
(how much the wife likes it) + (everything else * 0)
-juice