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.
Comments
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.
Time for another test drive.
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.
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:
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.
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.
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!!!
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.
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....
I had no idea there were so few choices between a Yaris and the typical SUV.
tidester, host
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?
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
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)
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.
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.
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.
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!!
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...
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.
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.
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:
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.
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.
It's a Ford Edge SEL Plus AWD, and it's 7.6 seconds.
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.
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
Best of all this guy costs less.
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.
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.
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.
">
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.
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.
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!
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.
..."
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.