Hyundai Santa Fe vs Toyota RAV4 vs Mazda CX-7 vs Ford Edge

1235716

Comments

  • sssfegysssfegy Member Posts: 132
    thecat: good for you you are the first to report this kind of mileage , I would post that on the Toyota discussion so we can see it when need it, and if you check the other owners reports you will find that 20-22 overall is the norm and that's what we would go by not the exceptions :P
  • joe97joe97 Member Posts: 2,248
    While I respect Edmunds, it's one road test comparison, nothing to wow about.

    I don't personally own any of those three cars, but I have test driven all of them. While I found all three to be equally competent, the Hyundai Santa Fe has the edge in my opinion. The off-road capability is the best, by far, out of the three, while the road manner is quite pleasing. Hyundai defn. scores an A+ RE: interior design/quality and striking exterior. And, adding the typical bang for the buck, standard features, packaging, price, warranty, safety, Hyundai's got my vote.

    :)
  • sirvagabondsirvagabond Member Posts: 51
    I'm yet to make my purchase, which is leaning strongly towards the SF. But most reviews and customer impressions of the SF indicate that the off-road capabilities are less than desireable. Handling, cabin noise, power all are being said to be the negatives of the SF when off-road. Rather discouraging in my book, being that I'd like to take it out camping now and then. Although Im sure it'll perform quite well, I'd like to think it less the urban family cruiser that it's been pegged for.

    Time for another test drive.
  • gmarshall56gmarshall56 Member Posts: 20
    If you search through the discussion entries for the RAV4 you will see many owners saying that, curious enough, they were getting bad mpg (around 20) during the breakin period. Then, miraculously, after breakin, mpg improves to north of mid twenties. I have read several entries where RAV4 owners are getting 28mpg hghwy. Toyota must have technicians on the payroll that visit your vehicle late at night after a period of ownership and tweak the flux capacitor thingy so as to improve the mileage.... :surprise:
  • audia8qaudia8q Member Posts: 3,138
    Well, I would encourage you to keep reading this post. I've had my 4WD V6 Rav since April. I'm averaging 24.6 and have gotten as high as 27.8 on a road trip

    ok...so lets use 20 mpg for the CX-7 and 25mpg for the Rav. based on 12,000 miles pre year. What is the extra cost per year? $50-75?
  • gmarshall56gmarshall56 Member Posts: 20
    You raise a good point in regards to annual fuel expenditure comparing 20 mpg vs 25 mpg. Look my whole position here is to say that given these three vehicles, the CX-7 is at the bottom when it comes to mpg. And today, when we are all paying over 2 bucks a gallon, mpg is important, and I think it should be, unless your one of the fortunate many who has plenty of disposable income and doesn't have to worry about mpg - the people who buy Humm Vees. But I'm not one of those, and I have been looking for an SUV that gives me the utility value I need along with the best mpg I can get. Maybe I'm splitting hairs here, but, dammit, my defense against price gouging at the pump is to visit that pump the least amount of times as I can.
  • tinycadontinycadon Member Posts: 287
    "ok...so lets use 20 mpg for the CX-7 and 25mpg for the Rav. based on 12,000 miles pre year. What is the extra cost per year? $50-75?"

    1st of all, your math is WAY off.

    12,000/20 = 600gal
    12,000/25 = 480gal
    Difference = 120gal
    120gal x $2.50 (it's been $3 now $2, could go back to $2.50, who knows but it splits the diff.?) = $300, if that were just reg. gas, but the cx-7 requires premium so that will be more like $2.75 = $330.

    NOW, that's assuming that ALL the miles are hwy miles, which is not going to be the case. City driving will significantly drop the mpgs in the cx-7 more-so than the sf due to the fact the 4cy will work MUCH harder in city driving due to the heavy weight and "weaker" engine. (you really don't spool up the turbo in stop & go, smaller engine + heavy weight = inefficiency).

    Second, most people drive more than 12,000 miles, that's lease terms, I'd say 15k - 18k is more realistic.
    (assuming all hwy miles)
    15k = + 150gal x $2.75 = $412.50
    18k = + 180gal x $2.75 = $495.00

    So if you keep the car for 5 years you're looking at:
    12k a year x 5yrs = $1,650.00
    15k a year x 5yrs = $2,062.50
    18k a year x 5yrs = $2,475.00

    I'd say that's a little more significant then your understatement of $50-$75 a year.
  • vbbuiltvbbuilt Member Posts: 498
    It's interesting to see how y'all are STILL arguing over MPG. Look how tinycadon spent so much time and effort composing the email, with all of those calculations :P

    Me? I've said it before in these forums: If you can't afford the gas, then don't buy the vehicle. If MPG were so important to ya'll, you'd have opted for a hybrid, yet here ya'll are, buying/using SUVs and griping about the MPG.

    Go ahead though. I'll sit on the side lines and smile.

    Have fun with MPG!

    Vince.

    Oh, BTW, it took me one minute to compose this email.

    :shades:
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Yeah, but if you pay attention to the details, like operating expenses, you can wind up saving enough to be able to afford a bigger capital expense if that's your wish. Plus it's fun keeping track of mpg for some of us. :shades:
  • gmarshall56gmarshall56 Member Posts: 20
    Thank you, tinycadon for doing the math for us. I would have done it but I'm just too lazy. And I failed to mention in my previous entry that I thought the $50-$75/year sounded kinda low as well

    And, I don't mean to be arrogant here, mr. vbbuilt, but I would like to hear your position again once fuel prices go back up north of $3.00. Everybody has their breaking point, and I think the consumers of this country are beginning to cross that threshold, even now when fuel prices have eased off, where they are finally wiseing up about the cost at the pump. When those pump prices go back up, and I think they will, sooner or later I think you will join the mpg bandwagon. The domestic producers are finally seeing the demand for mpg, whereas Toyota saw it several years ago. Thus you now see the introduction of many new products on the market that are feeding the mpg demand.
  • audia8qaudia8q Member Posts: 3,138
    Actually I did't do the math...I was just throwing out numbers sarcastically... but quite frankly if $300-400 per year is a deal breaker your probably looking at the wrong class of car. There is nothing wrong with the RAV, I think its a great quality vehicle but its about as exciting as a 5lb bag of fertilizer..... few hundred per year is well worth the fun of driving a CX-7.
  • vbbuiltvbbuilt Member Posts: 498
    I considered those implications when I chose the CX7. Let's face it, if gas were to hit $5.00 a gallon, then what? Abandon the vehicle? Buy a new vehicle with all of the attendent costs associated with financing? Try to see if I can sell it on the open market? If so, who would buy the CX7. Should I take a huge loss?

    No, when I chose the CX7, it was purely for reasons OTHER than MPG. If gas were to climb to $5.00 a gallon, then I'd simply absorb the costs and make other adjustments in my budget and lifestyle.

    That's why worrying about MPG is ludicrous for those who own or comtemplate purchasing SUVs. If MPG is so important, then DON'T BUY AN SUV!

    Vince.
  • gmarshall56gmarshall56 Member Posts: 20
    Why do I feel like I'm being reprimanded by a college professor? ;)

    Well there you go. As you said, you did not buy the CX7 for the mpg. You can't, cause the mpg sucks. Both you and audia8q bought it for the sport and style it represents, and it sure does. I will not take that away from it. If gas goes to 5 bucks you guys will still love it. God bless ya.

    There is nothing outrageous about the consumer who is going to spend 30k or more on a vehicle to get what he/she wants...If the consumer wants an SUV with decent gas mileage, that is NOT an unreasonable request!!!
  • tinycadontinycadon Member Posts: 287
    That's why worrying about MPG is ludicrous for those who own or comtemplate purchasing SUVs. If MPG is so important, then DON'T BUY AN SUV!

    Some people don't have much of a choice, if some guy has a wife and 3 kids what is he supposed to do, buy a Yaris????? I don't think it's unreasonable of people to want better mileage out of their suv's, heck, if people DIDN'T speak up about it and voice their complaints we'd all be driving suv's that get 8-10mpg 'cause the automakers would have no reason to improve mileage!!!

    All I did was spend 5 minutes doing some simple, basic calculations to show that it's NOT how much it's going to cost over 1 year, but rather, the cumulative effect over the YEARS. If you can't distinguish between the two that's not my fault, and if it's not a big deal to you to spend THOUSANDS extra on just gas alone over the lifetime of the vehicle great, it might be a big deal to someone else though, and to dismiss them and their concern as silly or foolish is being silly and foolish.
  • gmarshall56gmarshall56 Member Posts: 20
    thank you tinycadon... :D:D:D

    I'm sure that the CX7 is more sexy and more exciting to drive than the RAV, but there comes a point in time where cost of ownership, which, obviously includes fuel consumption, will TRUMP sexy....
  • tidestertidester Member Posts: 10,059
    what is he supposed to do, buy a Yaris?????

    I had no idea there were so few choices between a Yaris and the typical SUV. ;)

    tidester, host
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 20,815
    if you are like some with kids, you already have an suv, and get the bang box to commute in(looking in the mirror). ;)
    btw, my neighbors have a 4runner and a new rav4. they were nice enough to offer me a ride to a school event our kids were participating in, 50 miles away. guess which vehicle we went in?
    2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • vbbuiltvbbuilt Member Posts: 498
    Consumer Reports just came out with their preliminary look at the CX-7...they don't like it. To be fair, they do cite some issues that we all, by now, are familar with. The article says they'll do a full review in Jan 07.

    So, now, some of you can say "gotcha".

    http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/news/october-2006/first-look-2007-mazda-- cx-7-10-06/overview/0610_first-look-2007-mazda-cx-7_ov.htm

    Vince
  • astegmanastegman Member Posts: 171
    Read the article - oh well! Whatcha gonna do?

    Consistent with the attempt to instill a sporty character, the gauges are located deep within individual tubes.

    What does this mean??

    I think everything they point out in the article is true, and thus, it's up to each consumer to decide if those points are deal breakers. They weren't for me, but at least the information is out there. As Sy Syms always said, "An educated consumer is our best customer." (shout out to those of you in the NY/NJ/CT tri-state area) ;);)
  • d_hyperd_hyper Member Posts: 130
    When the article starts by saying "Tribute" is a rebadged Ford, the author just looses at least some of the credibility. But thanks for the link.
  • sirvagabondsirvagabond Member Posts: 51
    I think it means that the gauges are recessed deep in the dash in circular pockets or 'tubes'.

    I tried to like the CX-7, but when I went to the Mazda lot to take a look, I didn't even search out a salesman. Didn't like the outside at all. eh.. no biggie. Sexy to some, but so is Liza Minelli .

    CX-7, Tribute, Rav, SF...... like pairs of shoes. Some fit the foot, some dont.

    happy driving all.
  • sssfegysssfegy Member Posts: 132
    Sounds very typical of CR towards Mazda, highlighting the negatives in details, and just running through the positives. And is this the first turbo they ever drive? Even when talking about the transmission even though it's smooth they still make it sound bad that it is the only choice available?! Radio controls are on the steering wheel so makes sense for main controls to be closer to the passenger! And ofourse the Rav they drove was perfect and no negatives! Thanks vbbuilt for the article.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    I suppose CR could call the Tribute a "twin" to the Escape instead, since that's how Edmunds has referred to it. I am more likely to associate Volvo and Jag with Ford than Mazda though.
  • vbbuiltvbbuilt Member Posts: 498
    It's a well-known fact. Tribute is a rebadged Ford. If you compare both side by side they're virtually identical. Ford owns 30% of Mazda, so many parts are interchangable. Both the Tribute and the Escape were manufactured at a Ford plant, on a new purpose-designed Mazda platform but using Ford-sourced powertrains.

    If you go back a few years, the Ford Probe and Mazda MX6 were twins, both built in Flat Rock, Michigan, at a plant jointly owned by Mazda and Ford.

    Same thing with the Toyota Matrix and the Pontiac Vibe. Both are corporate siblings. There are other examples.

    Vince.
  • audia8qaudia8q Member Posts: 3,138
    It's a well-known fact. Tribute is a rebadged Ford. If you compare both side by side they're virtually identical..

    Mazda and Ford created a joint team to collaborate on the R&D of both vehicles.
    For the first time, Mazda/Ford engineers teamed up spending two years working together on the project at the collaboration office located in Hiroshima, JAPAN.
    Mazda’s engineers interfaced directly with the Ford engineering system (WERDS), as Ford’s engineers did with the Mazda engineering system (MIDAS).
    Drawing Information: Mazda had US Ford-oriented suppliers learn about Mazda’s R&D system.
    Drawing Format: Mazda and Ford set up a common format for the drawing work and defined a common engineering process.


    PRODUCTION
    At the production stage both companies ‘bridged’ their different production systems but at this point no longer used a common interface. Right-hand drive Tributes are built in Japan all others in Kansas City.


    PRODUCT DIFFERENCES
    The Mazda Tribute and Ford Escape, while built on the same platform, are uniquely different, with different positioning and product concepts.
    Almost all panels are unique. Only the roof panel, windshield and front door glass are shared by both models. B- and C-pillars are different and the outer door handles are different. There are even unique exterior colors.
    On the inside, only the A- and B-pillar trim, center console, rear door trim and speakers are common. Everything else is unique to the Tribute, including the instrument panel and cluster design. Even the Tribute’s audio system was tuned by a Mazda engineer.
    There is unique tuning in the steering, suspension, and transmission. In fact, six months were added to the normal development process to allow for an additional stage of tuning to achieve performance characteristics unique to the Tribute.
    On V6 models, the Tribute has a unique steering gear [ratio is 15.0, while the Escape is 16.7].
    The class-leading suspension is a Mazda design and was tuned by Mazda engineers. The front stabilizer bars have a different diameter, and the front and rear shock absorber damping gives the Tribute the handling feel of a sports sedan.
    The calibration of the automatic transmission is unique to the Tribute, using a more aggressive shift schedule for quicker acceleration at higher speed. The manual transmission is a Mazda unit.
    Mazda had overall responsibility for the engines, which were based on the Mazda Engineering Standard. Mazda designed the overall packaging, intake and exhaust, air cleaner, intake manifold, engine mounts, battery and alternator.
    Over-the-hood visibility is regarded as significantly better in Tribute due to the shape of the fenders.
    The rear liftgate incorporates flip-up rear glass. A sheet of plywood can be loaded through the flip-up glass, only possible in the Tribute because of the shape of the rear glass.
    Differences in the seat cushion give the Tribute better lateral support.
  • d_hyperd_hyper Member Posts: 130
    In my dictionary, "Rebadged" means developed by someone else and slapped a new badge. Tribute was built on European Mazda 626 platform and entered the market 6 months earlier (if I remember correctly) than Escape or Mariner for that matter. They are all "twins/triplets" sharing Mazda platform and to say CX-7 is "a first own entry into crossovers" is incorrect.
  • joe97joe97 Member Posts: 2,248
    How did we get here? Anyway, Escape and Tribute are, in essence, the same - whichever ways the automakers would like to put a spin to them, they are siblings.

    Anyway, back on topic - after driving all three cars, I drove the Santa Fe for a second time:

    1) I continued to find the great off-road capability in the Santa Fe, which was even mentioned in the review referred to by our original poster.

    2) The interior is just so pleasureable to be in it that I couldn't give up the keys :-) I'd go as far as to say the interior is probably one of the best, design-wise - not just in Hyundai cars but in the whole industry...

    3) The 3.3L V6 was very strong, accelerating was smooth and the interior cabin was extremely quite even when I punched down the pedal.

    4) Braking felt effortless, thanks to all of the standard safety equipment on board.

    5) There are a lot of amentities and accomdations on the Santa Fe; very neat and well thought-out features everywhere, both inside and out.

    Conclusion: Bravo Hyundai!!
  • bigelmbigelm Member Posts: 995
    may be something to consider. It will be arriving this month and I'll be taking a test drive to finalize my wife's next SUV. SF or Outlander... soon to know. Mitsu claims 27 Hwy MPG.. that's not bad from a 6 cyl.
  • srangersranger Member Posts: 106
    I wanted to point out that there is a very simply reason why new cars typically get worst gas milage to start with. While it is true that after a break in period ( about 500 miles ) you will see about 1-2mpg savings the real answer is quite simple.

    It is a new toy. People tend to accelerate quickly more often when playing with their new toy. After a while the new wears off and generally they quit doing it. It can easly be proven that quick accelerations can negativly affect your milage as much as 5mpg...

    This is especially true of a small SUV with a 200hp+ engine. It is simply cheap thrill before the new wears off...
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    It's been a while now since I bought a new car and break in recommendations seemed to have eased quite a bit. My manual basically said to break my new van in gently, meaning no hard starts, high rpms and no cruising for long distances at the same speed. So I treated it gingerly for the first 1,000 miles.

    My mpg really didn't hit its stride until 10,000 miles on that ride. Maybe mpg and performance would have been better if I had pushed it hard early on, like many motorcyclists recommend.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    When Lincoln rolled a brand spanking new LS off the assembly line in Wixom the first thing they do is put it on a chassis dyno and go WOT. Most modern engines just need varying engine speeds to ensure even wear of components for the first few thousand miles.

    Not sure about the new 3.5L but the 3.0L Duratec takes around 5K miles to "loosen up" and produce maximum power and fuel economy. If it were just fuel mileage I might agree with the "new toy" argument but in this case it's not just mileage but also power that increases. The engine is just built tight and needs to loosen up.

    Of course that may not be true of all engines. But it does happen.
  • mcswinemcswine Member Posts: 30
    "Very typical towards Mazda"? They love the 3...I think it's their toprated small car. I don't think CR harbors a "Mazda hate".
  • carlitos92carlitos92 Member Posts: 458
    Car & Driver's December issue has a road test of the Edge. It's not a comparison, but they do directly say that the CX-7 does just about everything better, for less money. Seems like the Edge ended up being heavy and expensive if not necessarily slow. I had high hopes for Ford this time around, and maybe it'll sell well anyway, but my overall sentiment is disappointment.

    The only stats I remember are: weight around 4500 lbs, 0-60 in 7.6 seconds, 15 mpg observed, and an as-tested price of over $36,000. :surprise:
  • philmophilmo Member Posts: 77
    Well, the title of the forum has 4 cars in it but nobody out there has driven the Edge unless they're part of the automotive press; or seen it unless they happened to be in San Francisco last month (as was I) where Ford had a big display setup at the Embarcadero Center. I walked through the display and took a quick peek inside an Edge but didn't really know what I was looking at -- or shopping for -- at that time. I wish I would have looked more closely as the Edge is the big question mark on my shopping list.

    The RAV4 hits a sweet spot with power, mileage and quality but the swing door is a huge, boneheaded mistake. For me, using the vehicle for camping, skiing, fishing in the Rockies -- where is rains almost every day in the summer -- having that door swung out instead of overhead is pure Kerrigan... "Why, why, why?" Then I realized why: the marketing wonks at Toyota said they had to have a third-row seat to compete knowing full well that a majority of their buyers don't want or need it. As a result, the well below where others put the spare tire was cannibalized for models that need the third-row seat. Geez, Mitsubishi figured out how to do both with the new Outlander.

    I drove the Santa Fe and was impressed though it didn't exactly drill me back into the seat when I stomped on it climbing west out of Denver on I-70. And the rear deck doesn't go fully flat when laying the seats down which impacts storage and sleeping. The lower cushions aren't removeable which further takes away from volume.

    The CX-7 may be in the running if I decide that cargo can be compromised for fun, but the CX-9 is just around the corner and may better fit the bill though I hate having to take the third row instead of it being an option.

    Finally, off-topic, there's the Nissan Murano which has a huge rear opening -- enough to swallow my pontoon boat frame while assembled.

    Oh well, still shopping. Thankfully the old Grand Cherokee is running just fine.
  • sssfegysssfegy Member Posts: 132
    That's exactly what I mean..they rate it the best but you have to read to realise it is, they recommend the Civic as the "Top Pick"! I find that very unfair.
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    "...0-60 in 7.6 seconds.."

    Thats not right. The Lincoln MKX in the same issue was actually tested (the Edge was not). The MKX is basically a copy of the Edge, maybe about 150 lbs heavier, and it managed 8.1 secs 0-to-60. The Edge AWD will do that in about 8 seconds flat because its slightly lighter. The Edge FWD version will probably do it in 7.8 or 7.9 seconds since it doesn't have to turn an extra viscous coupling.
  • carlitos92carlitos92 Member Posts: 458
    I have no idea what you are talking about. I'm referring to Car and Driver, December 2006, pages 88-93.

    It's a Ford Edge SEL Plus AWD, and it's 7.6 seconds.
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    I haven't seen the paper issue. I was going online to Car&Driver_online_click_here

    Its interesting that the Edge AWD gets 7.6 seconds, when the same magazine clocks the Lincoln MKX at 8.1 sec. They are not much different, so why the difference?. We expect a little variation, but remember they make several runs and average for greater accuracy. And their instrumentation is excellent, test methods standardized. The same magazine clocks the Murano at 7.5 secs 0-60, so we know the Edge/Murano are very similar in acceleration, anyway.
  • arumagearumage Member Posts: 922
    It depends on if the MKX was AWD or not. If it wasn't AWD, wheelspin could easily cause it to drop. It's also very dependent on the driver. The CVT probably helps the Murano alot in acceleration, but it is belt driven rather than chain driven like the Freestyle. That scares me a bit.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,242
    A national newspaper is looking to interview consumers who have recently (within the past three months) purchased an SUV and crossover because of its optional or standard third-row seating. Please send an e-mail to ctalati@edmunds.com no later than Friday, November 10, 2006 by 2:00 PM PST/5:00 EST containing your daytime contact information.

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
    Review your vehicle

  • foxrunfoxrun Member Posts: 16
    I work at the plant where the Edge is being made and as biased as you want to believe I am I do have to tell you that the Edge is one sweet ride. Starting with the option of positioning the front seat exactly where you want it to the responsive acceleration matted to a smooth 6 speed transmision-O/D this car is at the top of its game. What about that vista roof? is there anything out there even close to it? its like having all the advantages of a convertable without any of the disadvantages. Nav system, Sattelite radio, mp3 connection and this guy needs only regular 87 octane rated gas to get its 265 hp rating unlike all its competition needing ultra premium for thiers.

    Best of all this guy costs less.
  • carlitos92carlitos92 Member Posts: 458
    Maybe you need to drive the others.

    The Edge is, on average, about 500 lbs heavier than the competition, and is generally more expensive than every vehicle listed in this thread.

    I'm sure that the Edge will have plenty of buyers who just have to have the blue oval or a humungoid moonroof. But it ain't at the top of its game by a long shot.
  • foxrunfoxrun Member Posts: 16
    Hey carlito did you read any of my post or just what you wanted to read. Let me repeat a few, VISTA ROOF- the whole roof basically is glass none of the competition has that, 6 SPEED TRANSMISSION= smoother ride- all others have at best 5 SPEED, MORE INSULATION= quieter ride less wind noise, and will cost significantly less to run on a daily basis because it needs only 87 octane fuel- the competion needs premuim fuel.

    Where the heck are you going with the Edge is more expensive then the competition or the MKX for that matter. The Murano which is the Edges direct competition is $2500 more, has less hp, a questionable CVT system and a 5 year old design. The RAV4 is cheaper if you get the 4 cylinder and only by $500. As for the MKX's competition the ACURA's prices are just way out there, and the Infinty FX45 is at least $3500 more.

    Should I go on.
  • rafael2rafael2 Member Posts: 20
    Fine lets say that the Edge is THE CAR,I still dont read people speaking about QUALITY BUILT.

    I won't spend $25,000 to $36,000 on a POOR BUILT CUV (car).

    SO, TALK BUILD QUALITY!

    Not to mention that "Fully ELECTRIC CARS :shades: " are around the corner in 2008 by Testa Motors,Zap cars and a bunch of other.
    http://www.teslamotors.com/index.php?js_enabled=1

    Hydrogen also, and forget deasel and Ethanol. Thanks to Brazil taking a stand as the world leading alternate fuel producer to Oil, the world had an example to follow to a better tomorrow.

    Im saying, IS THIS EDGE will last me for 15-20 year and about 200k miles like [non-permissible content removed]. do or better?? :mad:

    Quality is critical here, LETS TALK ABOUT IT. :)

    ">
  • cellolovercellolover Member Posts: 3
    I am shopping for a small/medium SUV and have narrowed down to Hyundai Santa Fe, Acura RDX, and Honda CRV. My concern is that while Santa Fe is getting fairly good reviews I am not so certain about their quality or reliability, RDX looks great but it is a little pricey and I wonder whether it is worth it while CRV's reliability is proven but it looks cheap even with leather option. Any idea?? Thanks.
  • carlitos92carlitos92 Member Posts: 458
    I read your post. There's a lot of biased speculation and subjective comparison in there, which usually leads to heartache when people start dragging out real numbers.

    Vista roof = big deal. With a Ford, it sounds like a maintenance nightmare, ESPECIALLY on a first-year model. Anybody who would buy a car only because the sunroof is twice as big as the competitors' is asking for trouble anyway.

    The CX-7 has a 6-speed transmission.

    The engine uses regular fuel because it lacks some of the technological advances of the other models (at least for now). And if it's only going to get 15 mpg (as being observed by some testers), it's hardly the poster child for saving its owner money.

    I didn't see the Murano, Acura, or Infiniti in the title of this thread. Option the vehicles out the same way, and the Ford is more expensive than the CX-7, Santa Fe, and RAV-4.

    If they put 500 lbs of sound-deadening in the Edge, I'd be inclined to agree with your claim of less wind noise, but I suspect the Edge's porkiness has more to do with the fact that Ford can't engineer an efficient vehicle, even when they are handed a Mazda platform to start with.

    As an American and former Ford owner, it doesn't make me happy to tell you any of this - but right now, it looks like he best thing the Edge has going for it is that it's better than the Explorer.
  • foxrunfoxrun Member Posts: 16
    The vista roof is flawless on every one I've driven. Before you get silly, thats what I do, drive and test them and I've driven thousands of them Edge & MKX.

    Newsflash buddy, the CX-7 is an Edge with a 4 cylinder the same 2.3L that goes in the Escape,Focus,Mazda3,Tribute & Mazdaspeed3 , of course its going to be CHEAPER and that 6 speed transmission is EXACTLY the same as the Edge. Rav4 is a 4 cylinder too, wake up.

    As for the low tech engine in the Edge. Well it seems to get more HP and torgue using the cheapest gas out there. The CX-7 needs a turbo for 240hp, I would hate to see what that'll do to the engine in a few years. The Rav4 has 166hp at 6000 rpm pfffff and the 6 cylinder has 269, lol I'm surprised they didn't just say 266, like Toyota doesn't have a history of over rating thier HP, plus the Rav still only has a 5 speed transmission.

    Oh ya you did say Sante fe, well lets leave that one alone the poor people that actually buy that should not be attacked its just not polite.
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    Based on the evidence so far, Edge can be summed up, from several tests from experienced automotive testers (and foxrun's comments), and hard numbers out now to size it up:

    Acceleration: Good
    Fuel Economy: Poor for it's size
    Braking: Poor
    Skidpad (turning capability): Poor
    Roominess: Fair
    Ride Smoothness: Good
    Steering feel: Fair-to-Good
    Pricing: Fair
    Styling: Fair
    Transmission: Good
    Engine: Good
    Vista Roof: Cool
    Quietness: Good
    Ford's Reputation: Poor-to-Fair
    Safety Features: Good, although awaiting crash tests.
    All-weather / All-Road capability: Good

    Verdict: I wouldn't buy it (others slightly better), but Ford got close to a real winner, and you wouldn't be wrong to want one. It scored a few "Goods" there, and one "Cool".

    For me, the Freestyle is best (MPG/crash tests/roominess), while the new Suzuki XL7 is my second choice. Good choices are the Pilot, CX9 or CX7, Highlander, Murano (Murano's only vice is that it rides a little rougher).

    The Edge lost the edge when it came in about 400 lbs over-weight. Bad engineers!.. Bad!
  • carlitos92carlitos92 Member Posts: 458
    Of course the vista roof is flawless on every one you've driven. Get back to us if you ever own one for 5 years and let us know how that works out for you.

    You are wildly uneducated about the cars you claim to drive. The CX-7 and Edge aren't the same platform. As for the transmission, it ain't exactly made by Ford.

    The Ford V6 makes its power from regular gas using displacement. Pretty simple.

    I don't understand your point about the RAV. Yes, it is available as a I4 and V6, but I can option a V6 RAV out cheaper than a somewhat comparable Edge. If I were you, I would not race any V6 Ravs... their lowly 5-speed transmission works just fine.

    A little light reading would do you some good (try some of these forums, or Google)... I'm done arguing until you start making sense. You might start with catching up on Hyundai's consumer satisfaction surveys, as well as the financials of their company. I think you'll find some interesting contrasts to FoMoCo. Good luck.
  • coldcrankercoldcranker Member Posts: 877
    "...You are wildly uneducated about the cars you claim to drive. The CX-7 and Edge aren't the same platform. As for the transmission, it ain't exactly made by Ford.
    ..."


    The Edge tranny is a GM/Ford joint design, but Ford manufactures its own trannies. The CX-7 may be the Aisin(?) one currently used in the Ford500.
This discussion has been closed.

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.