Did you recently rush to buy a new vehicle before tariff-related price hikes? A reporter is looking to speak with shoppers who felt pressure to act quickly due to expected cost increases; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com for more details by 4/24.
Your reply resonated with me. My second choice is to buy the 08 Pilot (a 5 year old design that has an excellent record for reliability and safety. But their new model will be out in a few months. Functionally it may be more like an Acadia, but I know nothing but rumors. I thought the Pilot 3rd row not as accessible as the Acadia, but it was better than the Highlander which is narrower in width. The Pilot has lots of acceleration, but gas mileage suffers.
Both my wife and I were attracted to the Acadia, and slightly repulsed by the Pilot. But I can still be happy with the Pilot, since I bought an ugly Ford Aerostar in 95 against the advice of my wife and daughter. It has been very reliable. And my daughter once borrowed it to take the girls to Vegas.
Yes, when you know someone killed in an auto accident, then you tend to shy away from those types of vehicles. A friend of mine had a friend killed in a SUV that flipped and they would never buy any vehicle that sits "high-up" like an SUV.
Actually not the case here. I may have been misleading. They had a minivan - the issue was a high speed rear-end collision not the vehicle. More accurate is that we consider those accidents as possible, and maybe as a variation on your point, would never let the kids sit in a seat without a head-rest.
I didn't write off 4 cylinder engines, I own a 4 cylinder Honda S2000 and a 4 cylinder Honda Accord and I'm happy with them.
But I test drove all of the competing CUV's several times and found that the 4 cylinder RAV-4 and CR-V felt rough and underpowered compared to the V6 RAV-4 and V6 Outlander. And the fuel economy wasn't very different in all of the real-world data that I could find. Even the price wasn't significantly different when similarly equipped.
I don't race my Outlander so 1 second faster 0-60 times aren't a big deal, but for me it's more enjoyable for the vehicle to easily merge onto the freeway and climb up hills when loaded with passengers. The V6 with 6-speed is a really nice combination, you should try one.
That was my point too.I had 97' maxima and we took trip to Poconos mountains, the car went easily any climb, compare to my previous car altima 4 cyc. Overall V-6 better, smoother, less switching gears engine.
If you're going to use the third row a lot then you should probably choose a larger vehicle.
IMHO if you use it at all you should consider a larger vehicle.
That's what we did, we have our big car, and now we're shopping for a compact crossover/wagon/SUV/dogsled whatever.
I would consider an Outlander, but only the 5 seat model. I plan to check it out at the DC Auto Show this weekend, along with competitors.
Looks like only the ES model comes with the base 2.4l engine/CVT? That would be a shame. You pretty much lose all the cool options.
For us this will be my wife's commuter/errands car. Doesn't need to be big, just big enough for 4, 5 on occasion, not too much gear (we use the big vehicle for that). If you've driven on the DC Beltway you'll understand why my wife wants an automatic this time, and something fuel efficient, so we're looking for a good 4 banger that is fun to drive, easy to park, nimble, and safe.
I may end up going on Sunday, anyone else in the DC area going?
I think that's a bit extreme. Let's face it, you're sitting closer to the side windows than the passengers in the third row are to the rear hatch. So if you get hit from the side you'll probably get hurt as well, even with side impact airbags.
At least there are crash tests to tell us how the passengers fare in side impacts.
Outlander got 5 stars from NHTSA for that passenger (which is where my kid sits), so that's good. I didn't see an IIHS result, though, looks like it wasn't tested. Why not? :confuse:
Forester also scores well in side impacts, in both NHTSA and IIHS tests, and that was before it even got side curtain air bags (new for 2009). I expect the new one to ace those tests.
I think that we'll see a few of these 3rd rows begin to disappear when they start regulating and/or crash testing safety in rear collisions.
Well, in some of those smaller 3 row vehicles, my head is on the glass or headliner, so it is closer. Your point is well taken, but those side airbags can make a big impact on damage scores in testing. Being in the biz, side impacts are the worst moderate speed collisions we see from an injury standpoint. On the one hand, I have some faith that more steel impact beams have been added to reinforce these new rear ends given their proximity to the passenger. On the other hand I remember that rear crash test many years ago (on the Dodge Caravan I think) where the rear hatch flew open and the seat came loose. In the end, a rear collision test can only be good from a safety standpoint. The extent of side intrusion beams only became standard after the side impact tests were adopted and results publicized. If any of these vehicles are lacking in rear protection, the market will force it to quickly be addressed.
C&D said Mitsubishi actually limits 3rd row passenger height to 5'2", something like that. So to be fair, you're really not supposed to put adults there anyway.
>> Looks like only the ES model comes with the base 2.4l engine/CVT? That would be a shame. You pretty much lose all the cool options.
Not only ES. A second 2.4-liter model, the new Outlander Special Edition arrives in early 2008. The Outlander SE combines the economy of the new 4-cylinder engine and CVT with amenities from the premium XLS model, plus exclusive new interior and exterior features. Driving performance in the Outlander SE is enhanced by Sportronic® shifting with magnesium steering wheel paddle shifters or console shift, as in the Outlander XLS model. Like the XLS model, the Outlander SE is equipped with 18-inch alloy wheels. The FAST Key entry system, standard on LS and XLS models, is also standard on the Special Edition.
The Outlander Special Edition excels in onboard entertainment. Offered as standard, the 650-watt (max.) Rockford-Fosgate® Premium Audio system features digital signal processing and nine speakers, including a rear subwoofer. This high-end audio package, which is optional on the Outlander XLS, includes SIRIUS® Satellite Radio with six month pre-paid subscription.
Exclusive to the Outlander 2.4 SE are new interior door panel trim and chrome door handles, chrome-accented exterior door handles and side sills, mesh fabric seats with leather bolsters, and high-contrast instrument gauges. Some Outlander SE features will be available on other Outlander models for 2009.
So it seems SE model is actually is even better equipped vs. XLE model, and unlike XLE, the SE comes with Rokford Fosgate premium stereo standard.
that couldn't be more naive, how do you "limit" the height of an occupant for a test, end user or otherwise? someone dies in the 3rd row of a crash, mitsu gets sued, their defense, well after further review of the case we found the deceased to be 5'3 and taller than the 5'2 design limits we placed on ourselves to design the safety areas of the 3rd row.
cars are not amusement park rides with an attendant checking the hight of riders. unless of course they come one comes as a no cost option and they just take up residence with you and the family going with you everywhere so you are verified as in compliance allowing you to fully sue mitsu in the event of a death or injury back there.
Precisely why I think people looking for a 3rd row shop elsewhere.
chelentano: if you cut/paste and quote a large text like that, you should italicize it so we know it's marketing-speak, and not your own writing.
An SE models sounds better.
Why paddle shifters if it's a CVT? I never got that. You build a transmission capable of choosing an optimum ratio for any condition, then you take away that benefit and create artificial shifts.
A question, though, my Buyer's Guide says if you get NAV you lose the CD changer and can only load one CD, is that right? I guess you have to load the songs to the hard drive? Seems like extra work.
The CD automatically burns to the hard drive, takes about 2 minutes, then you can play it any time you want without having to use the CD. The hard drive holds something like 100 CDs. You can turn off the automatic burn feature if you want. The CD/DVD player is single disc, I don't recall ever seeing a multi-disc DVD player.
The shift points were added because lots of people requested the feeling of the car shifting. I think you can set it so it doesn't simulate shifting. The paddle shifters come in handy when going downhill, just click it down a gear for engine braking, to go back to full auto mode you hold the right paddle for a couple seconds. You never have to take your hands off the steering wheel.
The 3rd row on many CUVs is designed for limited use only. Any shopper should be able to figure that out when they check out the vehicle in person. Sit back there for a minute and you'll know whether it will fit your needs. For me it's fine, I've used it maybe 5 times in the first year, every time it was a fun experience for the kids who sat back there. The rest of the time it is hidden completely out of view with no loss of storage space or higher floor level.">
Hello again. Checking back in with our Crossover Comparison. After test driving the Toyota Highlander earlier this week, we thought that we should try out something a bit bigger, to better suit our overall needs/wants. So, I arranged for a test drive of a GMC Acadia. We arrived at the dealership, talked to the salesman, got the brochure and the keys, walked out towards the Acadias, and passed by some Enclaves on the way . Sudden stop . My wife looks at the big Buick and says excitedly; “Wow, do I ever like this. Is this one of the vehicles on our list?” I respond yes, but mention that we are here to test drive the Acadia today, and that we can drive the Enclave another day. She looks at the Acadias, then back at the Enclaves, then looks at the salesman and says; “Why don’t we drive the Enclave today?” The salesman smiles, realizes he’s got a nibble on his line and says that he would be just as happy to go back and get the keys for an Enclave. Not wanting to argue, I agree, and we go back in to get the keys and another brochure. Sensing my wife’s excitement, I ask the salesman for the keys to a CX model with as few options as possible. He smiles at me (as if we can both read each other’s minds) and says, “of course”. He takes us back to the vehicle and shows us around it, talking up how it compares so well to a Lexus RX350 (how does he know the Lexus is my wife’s favourite?), only more quiet, and with room for 7 or 8. This guy is good. My wife gets in the driver’s seat and begins to oooooh and aaaaah. Note to self: never take wife to a poker game. The salesman points out a few things about driving the vehicle and sends us on our way for a half hour test drive. My wife drives for the first 15 minutes. She’s loving it. She keeps talking about how smooth and secure it drives, and how she feels like she’s driving a luxury car. And of course about how good it looks, both inside and out. I ask her how it compares to the Toyota Highlander that we drove a few days earlier and she says that it’s just as good; no, its better; definitely better. I mention that we will have to drive every vehicle at least twice to make sure we do a fair comparison. She agrees. We stop to check out the second row seats (excellent), access to the third row (which is great), and third row comfort (also very good for 2). She loves the automatic tailgate, and we agree that storage behind the third row is significantly more than in the Highlander. So far everything is win/win. My turn to drive. I get in, shut the door, and suddenly realize - that is the best sounding door closing I have ever heard. And before even turning on the ignition, I feel isolated from the outside world. It is eerily quiet. Buick has done a really good job on this. I turn the ignition key and off we go again. I take it out on the highway for a good run. No problems. Adequate power (not quite as much as the Toyota). Solid steering feel. Smooth as butter. And quiet. I can’t believe how quiet this thing is. I take it to a new subdivision area with lots of road potholes and bumps. It handles the rough road very well. Much nicer than I remember the Highlander doing. Or does it just “seem” better, because it is quieter than the Toyota? I’m not sure. Heading back to the dealership, I mention to my wife to try not to gush too much about the Enclave to the salesman. If he knows this is the one you want, he will not be willing to deal much. We agree to tell him that it is just as nice as the Toyota, and that we will go back to drive the Toyota again for comparison purposes. I also ask her if she would like to try out the Acadia sometime as well. She says that would be okay, if we have the time, but that she really likes the Enclave, so it might be a waste of our time to try the Acadia. We get back to the dealership and give back the keys. We mention how we “liked” it and that we are going to drive the Highlander again to get a fair comparison, as well as the Veracruz and CX9. He tells us to please drive all those vehicles, but to make sure we come back to drive this one again too, and to let him know how it compares to the others. I’m thinking my wife has her mind made up already. But I’m hoping to get her to try the others too. On the other hand, I must admit, I really liked the Enclave as well. It’s better than I expected. It’s the nicest GM I’ve ever been in. Any thoughts, opinions, or suggestions?
I was very impressed with the Enclave as well. The pricing and deals out there seems to be quite a bit higher than similar vehicles such as the Highlander or Veracruz. I would suggest checking out the Limited Veracruz. Similar quite, smooth ride as the Lexus and Enclave. I test drove over 10 crossover's and my top 10 is 1. 09 Murano 2. 08 RDX 3. 08 Veracruz 4. Highlander. Good luck.
Thanks for the suggestions. I have talked on the phone with the Hyundai and Mazda dealers, but haven't arranged a test drive yet (just got salespeople names). I would be interested in your complete top 10 list, just out of curiosity. I had not considered the Murano or RDX. I didn't think they were large enough to hold 6 comfortably, plus luggage for a long road trip. Am I correct in that assumption? Speaking of lists, I noticed a ranking of 24 Mid-Sized SUVs on the US News site yesterday. It listed the Honda Pilot first, the Nissan Murano second, and the Buick Enclave third. Oddly, the Toyota Highlander was ranked 12th, and the Veracruz and CX9 were not yet ranked. There sure are a lot of SUV/CUV type vehicles available today. I'll start my own list after I drive a few more vehicles.
>> Why paddle shifters if it's a CVT? I never got that. You build a transmission capable of choosing an optimum ratio for any condition, then you take away that benefit and create artificial shifts.
Paddle shifters are there as convenience for manual mode, just as steering wheel based stereo controls are there for convenience and safer driving. For some consumers it's also an image thing: manufacturers used to put paddle shifters mainly on racing cars. Regardless how good is the CVT, it has no human input and it's completely computerized. On the other hand, the Outlander manual mode allows you to exactly simulate manual transmission and to apply your own personal driving style even thought there are no gears. And you can go from manual mode to auto and back to manual anytime on fly. .
>> A question, though, my Buyer's Guide says if you get NAV you lose the CD changer and can only load one CD, is that right? I guess you have to load the songs to the hard drive? Seems like extra work.
Somewhat it’s a space issue and somewhat there is less need for a changer. With Mitsubishi navigation and multi-communication system you have so many entertainment choices: music server content, AM/FM radio, Sirius radio, perhaps external iPod connected to car stereo, bluetooth phone, DVD video, CD audio. The DVD disk actually has a capacity of 4.7GB so you probably could fit about 5-10,000 mp3 tracks which is a capacity of multiple CDs.
Also I would not consider loading CD to the hard drive as "extra work". It can load your CDs to the music server automatically while you drive and listen to that CD.
The Enclave is a very nice vehicle. I'd probably go between that and the Mazda CX-9 as your choices (once you drive the CX-9, of course), with a nod to the Enclave if the benchmark is a RX-350.
Things my wife and I liked about the Enclave: 1. Smooth/quiet drive 2. Nice looking 3. Roomy inside, easy access to all rows (with captains chairs)
Things we didn't like so much: 1. Body roll 2. Not very peppy as compared to everything else we drove 3. Laggy transmission
We have decided against buying a 2008 Lambda because of issues that carried over from the 2007 models. I hear that the 2009 Enclave will get new transmission algorithm that can't be implemented in the 2008 model, and maybe a direct injection engine that will give it much needed HP. That would likely seal the deal for us, but right now we prefer the CX-9 for its smooth transmission and sporty demeanor.
Check out this website to get more info on pros and cons: Enclave forums
Thanks for the information. That's why we need to test these vehicles several times each; so we can check out things we missed the first time. I did not try any sharp turns to check out body role in either the Highlander or the Enclave yet. In 'normal' drving, I felt the Enclave was superior to the Highander in handling and steering feel. I thought both vehicles seemed 'peppy' enough (edge to the Highlander), but I didn't really push either one to check how they react when you really need them to go. I also remember that the Highlander's visiblity was good, but I didn't pay attention to it in the Enclave. Must do that next time. And I didn't notice any transmission lag in the Enclave, which seems to be a fairly common problem for some Lambda owners. I'll need to try it on some hilly terrain to see how it reacts.
It's my personal review after visited DC auto show today. So, Ford had displayed couple TX's. I check it out Eddie Bauer edition. I have sited driver seat, adjusted seat so it will comfortable for me (6'0"). Then I sited in second row seat (bench, surprising for Eddie Bauer ed.), so my knees was against front seat. The second row seats couldn't be adjusted, another surprised for me. So TX has less space between front seat and second, even numbers saying different, then GM CUV's, CX-9, Highlander. The Flex looks same as a TX inside.
An an owner of an Enclave I would say your assessments of the vehicle match mine. Our final choices came down to the CX-9 and the Enclave/Acadia.
Due to Mazda's way of optioning the vehicle it fell off our list after a test drive. I don't recall specifically the issue but IIRC the HID headlights were only available on the model with the 20" wheels, or something like that. I thought the CX-9 was a little stiff in that configuration. The CX-9 did have a pretty clear price advantage, once again IIRC.
For us, the Enclave was the clear winner over the Acadia. We liked the styling, the interior and the sound level better than the Acadia. Given how we optioned ours the MSRP was within a couple of hundred bucks of each other. Throw in the extra year of warranty and the Enclave was the clear winner for us.
One thing to note: with the curvaceous styling of the Enclave you can not get a 4 foot wide object in the rear, but you can in the Acadia. Additionally. believe it or not, I can not get our golf bags in the back width wise. I find that rather ironic given Buick's use of Tiger Woods in their ads.
1. Murano 09 2. RDX (little too firm, handles great) 3. Veracruz (Great all around car, very surprised by Hyundai) 4. Highlander (Originally my first choice, well done upgrades from 07’s, does everything pretty good but some minor flaws) 5. Enclave (Great looking car, very surprised an American car of this quality, great to see, Pricey and no deals or willing to be competitive in pricing) 6. CX-9 (Nice car and love how it is deceptively big, Sporty ride but a little too much road feel for me, Felt every bump and twist) 7. CR-V (A real fun ride and not as underpowered as I would think, but pretty basic interiors, smaller, 166hp v4, great on mpg though) 8. Santa Fe (nice car like the improvements, they even squeeze in a 3rd row, not sure why though, felt like it was missing something, if going with Hyundai pay a little more for the Veracruz) 9. Tribeca (A very floaty ride, not cheap, Not a bad looking car though) 10. Edge (Just underperformed in every way, I can’t believe people pay the price for this car, not to mention you get a constant reminder of Ford’s $ issues with their tacky BP gas cap ad. A real joke, they can’t even afford Brochures they told me, go online and print them out at home they said)
These are my personal rating based on performance, value, comfort, drive, and a few other factors. Also a 3rd row was not a big deal for me and somewhat of a drawback as I am young and single. I have done a ton of research and reviews on most of these vehicles as well, too much.
I also took a look at the Infiniti G35X (drove amazing but need utility) and EX-35 (simply too small, actually shorter than the G35, not a CUV at all. More like a small hatchback/wagon) Equinox and Pilot (did not care for either)
Then I sited in second row seat (bench, surprising for Eddie Bauer ed.), so my knees was against front seat. The second row seats couldn't be adjusted, another surprised for me. So TX has less space between front seat and second, even numbers saying different, then GM CUV's, CX-9, Highlander.
Being that the occupants of the second row of our vehicle are small children 99% of the time none of that matters to me and shouldn't to anyone in the same situation. Who buys one of these three row behemoths to make the occasional adult passengers comfortable? Does anyone sit adults in the second row of these things for long trips the majority of the time they are driving it? Wouldn't a smaller more efficient and better driving SUV/CUV be a better choice for them?
I've never understood the obsession with an inch or two of legroom. They do the same thing in the mid-size sedan thread and I don't get it there either.
The Flex looks same as a TX inside.
Either you weren't looking at the inside of a Flex, or you need your eyes checked immediately! :surprise:
Outlander V6...4WD, paddle shifters, quick DVD based touch-screen Nav, DVD player, music hard drive, 6 speed, V6, 3rd row seating, load leveling HID headlights, 9 speaker 650W Rockford Fosgate stereo, 18" alloys, great brakes, Bluetooth, 20+ mpg mileage, 10 year warranty, leather interior, best handling in class, PZEV engine, flip down rear tailgate, fastkey keyless entry & ignition. MSRP is $33K and you can get it for just under $30K.
Thanks for the input. I would actually look at the Outlander but too many consistent reviews mention drawbacks in comfort, utility, and mpg (for size) and price for what you get. In Edmunds inside line comparison test of compact SUV's it came in 4th behind the RAV-4, Rogue, CR-V. I am looking more towards a mid-size, and if I were to more compact it would be the RDX for a 2-3K more and much better. Same time I do like to check out these vehicles myself and not just based on reviews, but if there is a consistent consensus from multiple reviews on a car, tends to be true. Maybe i'll check it out though.
As far as the Taurus X, I have absolute zero faith in ford these days, and I'm not really into the Hearst look, no offense.
I really like the "Hearst" look it makes it look much more expensive than it really is... LOL
as for faith in ford, I'd argue that gm has had more serious teething problems with the lambdas than ford ever had with the FS/T-reX... as for the rest, whatever... You asked, I offered without trying to be "offensive".
not sure why people feel compelled to insult than say well really I didn't mean anything by it, why say it in the first place?
moving on, good luck with whatever you buy for whatever reason you choose it.
Its not an insult or a shot at you. I really do appreciate the suggestion and help on something i may overlooked. However when i look at the car that is the honest reaction i get. Felt compelled to say no offense b/c people can take their cars pretty personal. I do not think i am alone in thinking the ford X looks like a hearst. I personally would not buy it for that reason. Cars are subjective right, if everyone liked the same car that would be pretty boring and many companies would be out of business. Enjoy your Taurus X, i'll call you for arrangements for its use next time i know of a funeral.
So, let me understand this. You test drove all those cars, even the 09 Murano? That's 12 vehicles, I'm impressed. I have an 07 Freestyle SEL with a BP gas cap and it doesn't affect the style, performance, ride, interior space or value one bit. I was at my Ford dealer a couple of weeks ago and there was a rack with plenty of Edge, Taurus X and every other vehicle brochure in the Ford and Lincoln line. Maybe the dealer you went to just forgot to order some and was too embarrassed to admit it. As for the Edge, some friends just bought an SEL and I think it's a pretty nice car. Not as roomy as my Freestyle, but plenty of room for 4 adults going out for dinner. They got a really good deal on a nicely loaded 07. It was pricey, but still less than most you list with the options they have. We didn't have a chance to really open it up but it seemed to accelerate just fine on to the freeway and the ride was smooth and quiet. I don't know, there just seems to be a lot of Ford haters out there. I like mine, and my friends are very pleased with their purchase. Good luck making your decision.
However when i look at the car that is the honest reaction i get. Felt compelled to say no offense b/c people can take their cars pretty personal. I do not think i am alone in thinking the ford X looks like a hearst.
After reading your post I went back and looked at some pictures of the TX, and now that you mention it, I do see some resemblance to a hearse! I never really thought about it before, until you brought it up.
Bear in mind that I will soon be the owner of a TX in a few weeks, and your observation certainly hasn't changed my opinion. On the contrary, it'll come in handy lugging around the mother-in-law!
I don't argue about your opinion. It's good that you're liked. I just share my experience from auto show.
"Does anyone sit adults in the second row of these things for long trips the majority of the time they are driving it?"
Yes it does matter. When your kid will be hitting back of your seat. The TX no longer fuel saver with new engine in there. So, why not buy bigger more comfortable CUV.
About Flex: the interior looks same as TX. The second row moves same as TX, even seat same.The space behind third row looks same as TX. I have not measured with the tape. The very good CUV is Volvo. A lot space almost same as Acadia, rear smaller bottom part of the gate drops down, I liked it very much. ( I'm taking back what I said before about Volvo).
But if you're willing to spent 45 grand or more for family CUV the Mercedes R-class will be one of the best choices. The interior is superior compare to any CUV, at same time conservative using high quality materials, even interior door handles feels like you're sitting in the sedan. There're no reasons to compare R-class to Q7, R has much, much better interior and space. Q7 is more like oversize Toureg.
I don't have a T-rerX, I don't care really, I just don't understand why people feel the need to take shots at it when there is absolutely no reason to.
BTW - it's "hearse", I alluded to "Hearst" in my reply as he was a man of great wealth and taste in fine art from all era's, so calling it a "Hearst" could have been construed, while a stretch, as complimentary. As I mentioned I found the irony in the your statement and was just trying to point that out.
as for funeral arrangements you'll need at least a lambda because everyone around here knows you'd never get a coffin in a FS/T-reX as been proven time and time again here in this forum it's just not big enough. bigger is better in that instance, but keep trying. it more looks the part anyway...LOL
Crossover update. I went to both the Toyota and GM (Canadian) sites to build and price the Highlander and Enclave. (I only do this if the vehicle is still on my list after the first test drive.) I noticed at the GM site that the Enclave won an award from the Automobile Journalist Association of Canada (AJAC) as best new CUV above $60,000. To get it to that incredible price, they had to load it up with every conceivable option. I’m guessing they did this so it wouldn’t compete against the Acadia in the 35K-60K class and the Outlook in the under 35K class. The interesting thing is, the Enclave beat out some pretty nice vehicles: BMW X5, Mercedes Benz GL-Class, Mercedes Benz M-Class. Even more interesting perhaps is that the other two Lambdas did not win their divisions. The Highlander, Veracruz, CX9, Pathfinder, Tribeca, and Volvo XC70 were in the 35K-60K group with the Acadia, so they did not compete directly against the Enclave. This group was won by the Saturn Vue. I’m not sure how the ratings were determined, but obviously they were grouped on price rather than by size. Anyway, I priced a base Enclave CX, with the trailering package and delivery charges at 42665 before tax. I would have liked to include the backup camera, but it is part of a $4300 package only. If I buy the Enclave, I’ll probably get an aftermarket camera. The Highlander SR5 model (which adds the power drivers seat, 6 disc cd, auto rear liftgate, backup camera) priced out at 44,300 after adding trailering items and delivery charges, but before taxes. Of course, these are list prices, before incentives and dealer discounts. I know the Americans who read these posts will probably fall off their chairs, at how expensive vehicles are in Canada. I then went to a website that shows you (for a small fee) the Canadian retail and dealer cost prices for these vehicles (I’m not sure if it’s okay to mention the name of that site here, so I won’t). The difference between dealer cost and retail price on both vehicles is almost exactly $4000. I always go in with this information and tell the dealer I would be happy to allow them 25% of the difference, and usually end up negotiating it to around 30%. Hopefully that will work this time too. Our plans for the coming week are to take the Highlander and Enclave for a second test drive, plus either the Veracruz or CX9. I’ll let you know how it goes.
First off I wanted to say I appreciate your informative, balanced posts. Thanks for answering my questions, too.
I checked one out in person today at the DC Auto Show, ended up going a day later than planned, but I love auto shows and it's always worth going.
Saw the paddle shifters you mentioned, though the steering wheel was locked at a weird angle so it was hard to get a good feel for their use. I think they would be great for the V6 since it's a 6 ratio traditional auto, I just thought it was a bit odd for a CVT to simulate gears, whatever the reasoning.
They had 2 at the show, both V6s, though, no 2.4l w/CVT, bummer.
The 3rd row seemed tiny to me. My kids are 8 and 5, and big for their age, but I wouldn't put them there. That's just me, FWIW.
Fold them and the floor didn't seem totally flat. Yours looks better with that carpet there, at the show they take the mats out so they don't get stolen, so it looked unfinished.
The tail gate idea is interesting, though it's a two step process to open it wide. I guess most of the time you'd just lift the hatch, and that lip would keep cargo from rolling out. Fair trade for the utility of a tail gate seat, I suppose.
The wife wasn't a fan of the styling. She ruled it out right then and there. I checked it out anyway, though. (we're shopping for her, though)
We had just come from the 09 Forester, they were indeed pretty close together, Mitsu right next to Subaru. Sadly, no STI was there to compare to the EVO on display.
Any how, the moonroof is small compared to Subaru's. The Forester's opening is the same width but more than twice as long. Forester also had huge windows and the interior felt a lot airier, brighter. Best visibility in its class. Possibly the best visibility among any vehicle on the market. You see everything. I sat in the driver's seat and my 5 year old walked behind the car, and I could see his neck. In the Outlander I could only see his eyes, and he would disappear in the rear/side view in a blind spot. Not as bad as, say, the Rogue (Nissan should call it the Nissan Blindfold), which we also checked out, but not nearly as good visibility as the Forester.
That was excacerbated by the black interior on the Outlander. It's just too much, black plastic all around, black leather, and then black carpeting. You feel like the Prince of Darkness. The audio gagdets and sub woofer made it feel more like a huge, black plastic boom box than a family vehicle.
Your interior looks far better, is that Ivory though? I'd worry about stains if that's the case. Or is it just light gray?
I popped the hood to check the engines (both V6s), and again the prop rods lose to the very nice and unique hood struts on the Forester.
Outlander has more rear leg room, but the Forester's has improved as well.
I measured the cargo bay, and was surprised at how narrow the cargo floor is on the Outlander - just 38" between the wheel wells. Length is good, about an inch more than the Forester, but the Outlander actually gives up a whopping 4 inches of cargo width to the smaller Forester due to wheel well intrusion. That was a big surprise.
If it were for me, I'd test drive both. In fact, I probably still will, because I'm curious to test your opinion on the handling. Edmunds did rave about the Forester's handling, so it would be interesting to see which one drives better. I'll try to drive them on the same day.
We checked out a lot of these. I'll share some quick thoughts.
Jeep Compass: felt tiny inside, with cheap materials. Needs a lot of improvement Jeep Patriot: see Compass. Rogue: terrible, just awful, visibility. What is it with these massive D-pillars? RAV4: an oxymoron - a big compact. Some visibility issues, gate blocks curb side. Sante Fe: roomy and may sneak on to our short list as a value-priced underdog. CR-V: roomy but has poor visibility. Wife found it ugly. RD-X: looks much nicer, but it seemed a bit small, like the CX7.
We've already looked at and even driven the Vue, CX7, and a few others. Wife likes the Forester, RAV4, and Santa Fe, so we'll probably test drive those.
My Outlander has the tan interior because I thought the black was a little too dark. I'm happy with the tan, it has a black dash, black carpet, a black steering wheel, and graphite/silver accents. It's been easy to keep clean so far.
For some reason I never test drove or cross-shopped the Forester, I drove the Tribeca twice though and thought it was OK, a little overpriced...almost $10k more than my Outlander. The Forester looks like It doesn't have a lot of things I needed or wanted... Nav, Bluetooth, HID, 3rd row in a pinch, 18" wheels, Sirius radio. And some smaller points like Premium fuel vs. Regular for the Outlander. The auto tranny in the Subaru is only 4 speeds vs. 6 in the Outlander, etc.
But I know how it is, if the wife likes the Subaru better you don't have a lot of choices. You should sneak out and test drive the loaded Outlander though, just for fun. It has so much technology you might not be able to appreciate it until you get used to it, I was lucky to have a saleperson that showed me all of the cool features. It's actually very simple to use.
BTW, I added a wide-angle infrared rear view camera to mine so I have good vision out the back. Under $50 and it plays on the 7" DVD display when I put it in reverse. It even taps into the proximity grid built into the stock head unit. We have a pretty good Outlander forum (www.mitsubishiforum.com) for tech stuff like that.
"Thanks for the input. I would actually look at the Outlander but too many consistent reviews mention drawbacks in comfort, utility, and mpg (for size) and price for what you get. In Edmunds inside line comparison test of compact SUV's it came in 4th behind the RAV-4, Rogue, CR-V. I am looking more towards a mid-size, and if I were to more compact it would be the RDX for a 2-3K more and much better. Same time I do like to check out these vehicles myself and not just based on reviews, but if there is a consistent consensus from multiple reviews on a car, tends to be true. Maybe i'll check it out though."
If you read that review the major factor that hurt the Outlander was pricing because they chose the highest level Outlander. Pricing was a whopping 25% of the evaluation, the cheapest car got the most points (100), and the Outlander got last. Choose a V6 4WD Outlander without Nav and it would have been the cheapest, which would have put it neck and neck with the RAV4 for 1st place.
You really need to drive the vehicles. A review like that has so many subjective factors that it can become humorous why one vehicle wins over another. For example, they tout the RAV4 mileage, when in fact it was only 1mpg better than the Outlander.
along those line you further have to barter the deal to see what the numbers are really are going to come to as there are all kinds of things that factor into the bottom line. just going off of edmund's et al is going to get you close, but until you do it yourself in your local you really can't say how the number will fare.
>> I would actually look at the Outlander but too many consistent reviews mention drawbacks in comfort, utility, and mpg (for size) and price for what you get. In Edmunds inside line comparison test of compact SUV's it came in 4th behind the RAV-4, Rogue, CR-V.
Car sites and magazines make living off car advertising and they are not always objective or consistent. I am more interested in ratings by real-world owners. Real-world owners don't market or sell cars, instead they buy them paying hard earned dollars, so I have more trust to a 100 of real people who bought a car and drive it for a few months, rather then to one magazine “expert”, who drives a brand new car from dealership just for an hour and who sometimes wants to please its biggest customer-advertiser.
For instance the comparo you mention puts RAV4 and CR-V ahead of the Outlander, but the real world owners give the Outlander higher ratings consistently throughout all three major consumer rating sites:
Does anyone sit adults in the second row of these things for long trips the majority of the time they are driving it? Wouldn't a smaller more efficient and better driving SUV/CUV be a better choice for them?
Ummmmmmm, yes. My wife sits back there all the time for trips longer than 30 minutes because she can watch TV while I drive. Never heard a complaint about comfort. We also loaded it up with 4 adults and 3 kids for a 1200 mile round-trip. I did hear complaints, but they were more of the "are we there yet?" variety after hour number 5.
Honestly i am not too concerned with the compact suv's. I was in the market for a mid-size b/c they meet my needs better for my job. Anyway it came down to the Highlander, Veracruz, RDX (some consider compact but liked it) and the Murano. I am set to get the 2009 Murano. Now i am basically just trying to find the vehicle i want (difficult, only a few out there till March) and at the right price. Anyone who purchased this vehicle and has the details of their purchase would greatly be appreciated. Looking for an 09 SL with leather and moonroof. MSRP 33,995, invoice $31,254 or something like that.
Car sites and magazines make living off car advertising and they are not always objective or consistent. I am more interested in ratings by real-world owners. Real-world owners don't market or sell cars
Yes, magazines make money from advertising. No doubt about it. Do you have any proof that their comparos are swayed by how much advertising / money is given to the magazine for advertising purposes? This is a pretty strong claim, basically saying their reviews are bias. I'm sure I am not the only one who would like to see some proof. Personal opinion does not count.
As for sales, consumers seem to think the CR-V and RAV4 are a better bet to purchase, since their sales figures just trounce Mitsu's for 2007.
Comments
Both my wife and I were attracted to the Acadia, and slightly repulsed by the Pilot. But I can still be happy with the Pilot, since I bought an ugly Ford Aerostar in 95 against the advice of my wife and daughter. It has been very reliable. And my daughter once borrowed it to take the girls to Vegas.
Do you you have a weblink with this info?
But I test drove all of the competing CUV's several times and found that the 4 cylinder RAV-4 and CR-V felt rough and underpowered compared to the V6 RAV-4 and V6 Outlander. And the fuel economy wasn't very different in all of the real-world data that I could find. Even the price wasn't significantly different when similarly equipped.
I don't race my Outlander so 1 second faster 0-60 times aren't a big deal, but for me it's more enjoyable for the vehicle to easily merge onto the freeway and climb up hills when loaded with passengers. The V6 with 6-speed is a really nice combination, you should try one.
IMHO if you use it at all you should consider a larger vehicle.
That's what we did, we have our big car, and now we're shopping for a compact crossover/wagon/SUV/dogsled whatever.
I would consider an Outlander, but only the 5 seat model. I plan to check it out at the DC Auto Show this weekend, along with competitors.
Looks like only the ES model comes with the base 2.4l engine/CVT? That would be a shame. You pretty much lose all the cool options.
For us this will be my wife's commuter/errands car. Doesn't need to be big, just big enough for 4, 5 on occasion, not too much gear (we use the big vehicle for that). If you've driven on the DC Beltway you'll understand why my wife wants an automatic this time, and something fuel efficient, so we're looking for a good 4 banger that is fun to drive, easy to park, nimble, and safe.
I may end up going on Sunday, anyone else in the DC area going?
http://www.washingtonautoshow.org/
Who knows, you might meet your Representative there...
Outlander got 5 stars from NHTSA for that passenger (which is where my kid sits), so that's good. I didn't see an IIHS result, though, looks like it wasn't tested. Why not? :confuse:
Forester also scores well in side impacts, in both NHTSA and IIHS tests, and that was before it even got side curtain air bags (new for 2009). I expect the new one to ace those tests.
I think that we'll see a few of these 3rd rows begin to disappear when they start regulating and/or crash testing safety in rear collisions.
In the end, a rear collision test can only be good from a safety standpoint. The extent of side intrusion beams only became standard after the side impact tests were adopted and results publicized. If any of these vehicles are lacking in rear protection, the market will force it to quickly be addressed.
Not only ES. A second 2.4-liter model, the new Outlander Special Edition arrives in early 2008. The Outlander SE combines the economy of the new 4-cylinder engine and CVT with amenities from the premium XLS model, plus exclusive new interior and exterior features. Driving performance in the Outlander SE is enhanced by Sportronic® shifting with magnesium steering wheel paddle shifters or console shift, as in the Outlander XLS model. Like the XLS model, the Outlander SE is equipped with 18-inch alloy wheels. The FAST Key entry system, standard on LS and XLS models, is also standard on the Special Edition.
The Outlander Special Edition excels in onboard entertainment. Offered as standard, the 650-watt (max.) Rockford-Fosgate® Premium Audio system features digital signal processing and nine speakers, including a rear subwoofer. This high-end audio package, which is optional on the Outlander XLS, includes SIRIUS® Satellite Radio with six month pre-paid subscription.
Exclusive to the Outlander 2.4 SE are new interior door panel trim and chrome door handles, chrome-accented exterior door handles and side sills, mesh fabric seats with leather bolsters, and high-contrast instrument gauges. Some Outlander SE features will be available on other Outlander models for 2009.
So it seems SE model is actually is even better equipped vs. XLE model, and unlike XLE, the SE comes with Rokford Fosgate premium stereo standard.
http://www.ajc.com/ajccars/content/ajccars/content/stories/2008/01/09/carmitsubi- shi_0112.html
http://media.mitsubishicars.com/detail?mid=MIT2007111569663&mime=ASC
cars are not amusement park rides with an attendant checking the hight of riders. unless of course they come one comes as a no cost option and they just take up residence with you and the family going with you everywhere so you are verified as in compliance allowing you to fully sue mitsu in the event of a death or injury back there.
chelentano: if you cut/paste and quote a large text like that, you should italicize it so we know it's marketing-speak, and not your own writing.
An SE models sounds better.
Why paddle shifters if it's a CVT? I never got that. You build a transmission capable of choosing an optimum ratio for any condition, then you take away that benefit and create artificial shifts.
A question, though, my Buyer's Guide says if you get NAV you lose the CD changer and can only load one CD, is that right? I guess you have to load the songs to the hard drive? Seems like extra work.
The shift points were added because lots of people requested the feeling of the car shifting. I think you can set it so it doesn't simulate shifting. The paddle shifters come in handy when going downhill, just click it down a gear for engine braking, to go back to full auto mode you hold the right paddle for a couple seconds. You never have to take your hands off the steering wheel.
The 3rd row on many CUVs is designed for limited use only. Any shopper should be able to figure that out when they check out the vehicle in person. Sit back there for a minute and you'll know whether it will fit your needs. For me it's fine, I've used it maybe 5 times in the first year, every time it was a fun experience for the kids who sat back there. The rest of the time it is hidden completely out of view with no loss of storage space or higher floor level.">
We arrived at the dealership, talked to the salesman, got the brochure and the keys, walked out towards the Acadias, and passed by some Enclaves on the way . Sudden stop . My wife looks at the big Buick and says excitedly; “Wow, do I ever like this. Is this one of the vehicles on our list?” I respond yes, but mention that we are here to test drive the Acadia today, and that we can drive the Enclave another day. She looks at the Acadias, then back at the Enclaves, then looks at the salesman and says; “Why don’t we drive the Enclave today?” The salesman smiles, realizes he’s got a nibble on his line and says that he would be just as happy to go back and get the keys for an Enclave. Not wanting to argue, I agree, and we go back in to get the keys and another brochure. Sensing my wife’s excitement, I ask the salesman for the keys to a CX model with as few options as possible. He smiles at me (as if we can both read each other’s minds) and says, “of course”.
He takes us back to the vehicle and shows us around it, talking up how it compares so well to a Lexus RX350 (how does he know the Lexus is my wife’s favourite?), only more quiet, and with room for 7 or 8. This guy is good.
My wife gets in the driver’s seat and begins to oooooh and aaaaah. Note to self: never take wife to a poker game. The salesman points out a few things about driving the vehicle and sends us on our way for a half hour test drive.
My wife drives for the first 15 minutes. She’s loving it. She keeps talking about how smooth and secure it drives, and how she feels like she’s driving a luxury car. And of course about how good it looks, both inside and out. I ask her how it compares to the Toyota Highlander that we drove a few days earlier and she says that it’s just as good; no, its better; definitely better. I mention that we will have to drive every vehicle at least twice to make sure we do a fair comparison. She agrees.
We stop to check out the second row seats (excellent), access to the third row (which is great), and third row comfort (also very good for 2). She loves the automatic tailgate, and we agree that storage behind the third row is significantly more than in the Highlander. So far everything is win/win.
My turn to drive. I get in, shut the door, and suddenly realize - that is the best sounding door closing I have ever heard. And before even turning on the ignition, I feel isolated from the outside world. It is eerily quiet. Buick has done a really good job on this.
I turn the ignition key and off we go again. I take it out on the highway for a good run. No problems. Adequate power (not quite as much as the Toyota). Solid steering feel. Smooth as butter. And quiet. I can’t believe how quiet this thing is.
I take it to a new subdivision area with lots of road potholes and bumps. It handles the rough road very well. Much nicer than I remember the Highlander doing. Or does it just “seem” better, because it is quieter than the Toyota? I’m not sure.
Heading back to the dealership, I mention to my wife to try not to gush too much about the Enclave to the salesman. If he knows this is the one you want, he will not be willing to deal much. We agree to tell him that it is just as nice as the Toyota, and that we will go back to drive the Toyota again for comparison purposes. I also ask her if she would like to try out the Acadia sometime as well. She says that would be okay, if we have the time, but that she really likes the Enclave, so it might be a waste of our time to try the Acadia.
We get back to the dealership and give back the keys. We mention how we “liked” it and that we are going to drive the Highlander again to get a fair comparison, as well as the Veracruz and CX9. He tells us to please drive all those vehicles, but to make sure we come back to drive this one again too, and to let him know how it compares to the others.
I’m thinking my wife has her mind made up already. But I’m hoping to get her to try the others too. On the other hand, I must admit, I really liked the Enclave as well. It’s better than I expected. It’s the nicest GM I’ve ever been in.
Any thoughts, opinions, or suggestions?
I had not considered the Murano or RDX. I didn't think they were large enough to hold 6 comfortably, plus luggage for a long road trip. Am I correct in that assumption?
Speaking of lists, I noticed a ranking of 24 Mid-Sized SUVs on the US News site yesterday. It listed the Honda Pilot first, the Nissan Murano second, and the Buick Enclave third. Oddly, the Toyota Highlander was ranked 12th, and the Veracruz and CX9 were not yet ranked. There sure are a lot of SUV/CUV type vehicles available today.
I'll start my own list after I drive a few more vehicles.
Paddle shifters are there as convenience for manual mode, just as steering wheel based stereo controls are there for convenience and safer driving. For some consumers it's also an image thing: manufacturers used to put paddle shifters mainly on racing cars. Regardless how good is the CVT, it has no human input and it's completely computerized. On the other hand, the Outlander manual mode allows you to exactly simulate manual transmission and to apply your own personal driving style even thought there are no gears. And you can go from manual mode to auto and back to manual anytime on fly.
.
>> A question, though, my Buyer's Guide says if you get NAV you lose the CD changer and can only load one CD, is that right? I guess you have to load the songs to the hard drive? Seems like extra work.
Somewhat it’s a space issue and somewhat there is less need for a changer. With Mitsubishi navigation and multi-communication system you have so many entertainment choices: music server content, AM/FM radio, Sirius radio, perhaps external iPod connected to car stereo, bluetooth phone, DVD video, CD audio. The DVD disk actually has a capacity of 4.7GB so you probably could fit about 5-10,000 mp3 tracks which is a capacity of multiple CDs.
Also I would not consider loading CD to the hard drive as "extra work". It can load your CDs to the music server automatically while you drive and listen to that CD.
Things my wife and I liked about the Enclave:
1. Smooth/quiet drive
2. Nice looking
3. Roomy inside, easy access to all rows (with captains chairs)
Things we didn't like so much:
1. Body roll
2. Not very peppy as compared to everything else we drove
3. Laggy transmission
We have decided against buying a 2008 Lambda because of issues that carried over from the 2007 models. I hear that the 2009 Enclave will get new transmission algorithm that can't be implemented in the 2008 model, and maybe a direct injection engine that will give it much needed HP. That would likely seal the deal for us, but right now we prefer the CX-9 for its smooth transmission and sporty demeanor.
Check out this website to get more info on pros and cons: Enclave forums
So, Ford had displayed couple TX's. I check it out Eddie Bauer edition.
I have sited driver seat, adjusted seat so it will comfortable for me (6'0"). Then I sited in second row seat (bench, surprising for Eddie Bauer ed.), so my knees was against front seat. The second row seats couldn't be adjusted, another surprised for me. So TX has less space between front seat and second, even numbers saying different, then GM CUV's, CX-9, Highlander. The Flex looks same as a TX inside.
Due to Mazda's way of optioning the vehicle it fell off our list after a test drive. I don't recall specifically the issue but IIRC the HID headlights were only available on the model with the 20" wheels, or something like that. I thought the CX-9 was a little stiff in that configuration. The CX-9 did have a pretty clear price advantage, once again IIRC.
For us, the Enclave was the clear winner over the Acadia. We liked the styling, the interior and the sound level better than the Acadia. Given how we optioned ours the MSRP was within a couple of hundred bucks of each other. Throw in the extra year of warranty and the Enclave was the clear winner for us.
One thing to note: with the curvaceous styling of the Enclave you can not get a 4 foot wide object in the rear, but you can in the Acadia. Additionally. believe it or not, I can not get our golf bags in the back width wise. I find that rather ironic given Buick's use of Tiger Woods in their ads.
Its funny. Yesterday, i have watch some golf championship, where Tiger was played and during commercials breaks was Enclave commercial.
2. RDX (little too firm, handles great)
3. Veracruz (Great all around car, very surprised by Hyundai)
4. Highlander (Originally my first choice, well done upgrades from 07’s, does everything pretty good but some minor flaws)
5. Enclave (Great looking car, very surprised an American car of this quality, great to see, Pricey and no deals or willing to be competitive in pricing)
6. CX-9 (Nice car and love how it is deceptively big, Sporty ride but a little too much road feel for me, Felt every bump and twist)
7. CR-V (A real fun ride and not as underpowered as I would think, but pretty basic interiors, smaller, 166hp v4, great on mpg though)
8. Santa Fe (nice car like the improvements, they even squeeze in a 3rd row, not sure why though, felt like it was missing something, if going with Hyundai pay a little more for the Veracruz)
9. Tribeca (A very floaty ride, not cheap, Not a bad looking car though)
10. Edge (Just underperformed in every way, I can’t believe people pay the price for this car, not to mention you get a constant reminder of Ford’s $ issues with their tacky BP gas cap ad. A real joke, they can’t even afford Brochures they told me, go online and print them out at home they said)
These are my personal rating based on performance, value, comfort, drive, and a few other factors. Also a 3rd row was not a big deal for me and somewhat of a drawback as I am young and single. I have done a ton of research and reviews on most of these vehicles as well, too much.
I also took a look at the Infiniti G35X (drove amazing but need utility) and EX-35 (simply too small, actually shorter than the G35, not a CUV at all. More like a small hatchback/wagon) Equinox and Pilot (did not care for either)
Am i forgetting any good CUV in the 30-35k range?
Being that the occupants of the second row of our vehicle are small children 99% of the time none of that matters to me and shouldn't to anyone in the same situation. Who buys one of these three row behemoths to make the occasional adult passengers comfortable? Does anyone sit adults in the second row of these things for long trips the majority of the time they are driving it? Wouldn't a smaller more efficient and better driving SUV/CUV be a better choice for them?
I've never understood the obsession with an inch or two of legroom. They do the same thing in the mid-size sedan thread and I don't get it there either.
The Flex looks same as a TX inside.
Either you weren't looking at the inside of a Flex, or you need your eyes checked immediately! :surprise:
taurus x actually...
As far as the Taurus X, I have absolute zero faith in ford these days, and I'm not really into the Hearst look, no offense.
as for faith in ford, I'd argue that gm has had more serious teething problems with the lambdas than ford ever had with the FS/T-reX... as for the rest, whatever... You asked, I offered without trying to be "offensive".
not sure why people feel compelled to insult than say well really I didn't mean anything by it, why say it in the first place?
moving on, good luck with whatever you buy for whatever reason you choose it.
After reading your post I went back and looked at some pictures of the TX, and now that you mention it, I do see some resemblance to a hearse! I never really thought about it before, until you brought it up.
Bear in mind that I will soon be the owner of a TX in a few weeks, and your observation certainly hasn't changed my opinion. On the contrary, it'll come in handy lugging around the mother-in-law!
"Does anyone sit adults in the second row of these things for long trips the majority of the time they are driving it?"
Yes it does matter. When your kid will be hitting back of your seat. The TX no longer fuel saver with new engine in there. So, why not buy bigger more comfortable CUV.
About Flex: the interior looks same as TX. The second row moves same as TX, even seat same.The space behind third row looks same as TX. I have not measured with the tape.
The very good CUV is Volvo. A lot space almost same as Acadia, rear smaller bottom part of the gate drops down, I liked it very much. ( I'm taking back what I said before about Volvo).
But if you're willing to spent 45 grand or more for family CUV the Mercedes R-class will be one of the best choices. The interior is superior compare to any CUV, at same time conservative using high quality materials, even interior door handles feels like you're sitting in the sedan. There're no reasons to compare R-class to Q7, R has much, much better interior and space. Q7 is more like oversize Toureg.
BTW - it's "hearse", I alluded to "Hearst" in my reply as he was a man of great wealth and taste in fine art from all era's, so calling it a "Hearst" could have been construed, while a stretch, as complimentary. As I mentioned I found the irony in the your statement and was just trying to point that out.
as for funeral arrangements you'll need at least a lambda because everyone around here knows you'd never get a coffin in a FS/T-reX as been proven time and time again here in this forum it's just not big enough. bigger is better in that instance, but keep trying. it more looks the part anyway...LOL
Anyway, I priced a base Enclave CX, with the trailering package and delivery charges at 42665 before tax. I would have liked to include the backup camera, but it is part of a $4300 package only. If I buy the Enclave, I’ll probably get an aftermarket camera. The Highlander SR5 model (which adds the power drivers seat, 6 disc cd, auto rear liftgate, backup camera) priced out at 44,300 after adding trailering items and delivery charges, but before taxes. Of course, these are list prices, before incentives and dealer discounts. I know the Americans who read these posts will probably fall off their chairs, at how expensive vehicles are in Canada.
I then went to a website that shows you (for a small fee) the Canadian retail and dealer cost prices for these vehicles (I’m not sure if it’s okay to mention the name of that site here, so I won’t). The difference between dealer cost and retail price on both vehicles is almost exactly $4000. I always go in with this information and tell the dealer I would be happy to allow them 25% of the difference, and usually end up negotiating it to around 30%. Hopefully that will work this time too.
Our plans for the coming week are to take the Highlander and Enclave for a second test drive, plus either the Veracruz or CX9. I’ll let you know how it goes.
I checked one out in person today at the DC Auto Show, ended up going a day later than planned, but I love auto shows and it's always worth going.
Saw the paddle shifters you mentioned, though the steering wheel was locked at a weird angle so it was hard to get a good feel for their use. I think they would be great for the V6 since it's a 6 ratio traditional auto, I just thought it was a bit odd for a CVT to simulate gears, whatever the reasoning.
They had 2 at the show, both V6s, though, no 2.4l w/CVT, bummer.
The 3rd row seemed tiny to me. My kids are 8 and 5, and big for their age, but I wouldn't put them there. That's just me, FWIW.
Fold them and the floor didn't seem totally flat. Yours looks better with that carpet there, at the show they take the mats out so they don't get stolen, so it looked unfinished.
The tail gate idea is interesting, though it's a two step process to open it wide. I guess most of the time you'd just lift the hatch, and that lip would keep cargo from rolling out. Fair trade for the utility of a tail gate seat, I suppose.
The wife wasn't a fan of the styling. She ruled it out right then and there. I checked it out anyway, though. (we're shopping for her, though)
We had just come from the 09 Forester, they were indeed pretty close together, Mitsu right next to Subaru. Sadly, no STI was there to compare to the EVO on display.
Any how, the moonroof is small compared to Subaru's. The Forester's opening is the same width but more than twice as long. Forester also had huge windows and the interior felt a lot airier, brighter. Best visibility in its class. Possibly the best visibility among any vehicle on the market. You see everything. I sat in the driver's seat and my 5 year old walked behind the car, and I could see his neck. In the Outlander I could only see his eyes, and he would disappear in the rear/side view in a blind spot. Not as bad as, say, the Rogue (Nissan should call it the Nissan Blindfold), which we also checked out, but not nearly as good visibility as the Forester.
That was excacerbated by the black interior on the Outlander. It's just too much, black plastic all around, black leather, and then black carpeting. You feel like the Prince of Darkness. The audio gagdets and sub woofer made it feel more like a huge, black plastic boom box than a family vehicle.
Your interior looks far better, is that Ivory though? I'd worry about stains if that's the case. Or is it just light gray?
I popped the hood to check the engines (both V6s), and again the prop rods lose to the very nice and unique hood struts on the Forester.
Outlander has more rear leg room, but the Forester's has improved as well.
I measured the cargo bay, and was surprised at how narrow the cargo floor is on the Outlander - just 38" between the wheel wells. Length is good, about an inch more than the Forester, but the Outlander actually gives up a whopping 4 inches of cargo width to the smaller Forester due to wheel well intrusion. That was a big surprise.
If it were for me, I'd test drive both. In fact, I probably still will, because I'm curious to test your opinion on the handling. Edmunds did rave about the Forester's handling, so it would be interesting to see which one drives better. I'll try to drive them on the same day.
Jeep Compass: felt tiny inside, with cheap materials. Needs a lot of improvement
Jeep Patriot: see Compass.
Rogue: terrible, just awful, visibility. What is it with these massive D-pillars?
RAV4: an oxymoron - a big compact. Some visibility issues, gate blocks curb side.
Sante Fe: roomy and may sneak on to our short list as a value-priced underdog.
CR-V: roomy but has poor visibility. Wife found it ugly.
RD-X: looks much nicer, but it seemed a bit small, like the CX7.
We've already looked at and even driven the Vue, CX7, and a few others. Wife likes the Forester, RAV4, and Santa Fe, so we'll probably test drive those.
For some reason I never test drove or cross-shopped the Forester, I drove the Tribeca twice though and thought it was OK, a little overpriced...almost $10k more than my Outlander. The Forester looks like It doesn't have a lot of things I needed or wanted... Nav, Bluetooth, HID, 3rd row in a pinch, 18" wheels, Sirius radio. And some smaller points like Premium fuel vs. Regular for the Outlander. The auto tranny in the Subaru is only 4 speeds vs. 6 in the Outlander, etc.
But I know how it is, if the wife likes the Subaru better you don't have a lot of choices. You should sneak out and test drive the loaded Outlander though, just for fun. It has so much technology you might not be able to appreciate it until you get used to it, I was lucky to have a saleperson that showed me all of the cool features. It's actually very simple to use.
BTW, I added a wide-angle infrared rear view camera to mine so I have good vision out the back. Under $50 and it plays on the 7" DVD display when I put it in reverse. It even taps into the proximity grid built into the stock head unit. We have a pretty good Outlander forum (www.mitsubishiforum.com) for tech stuff like that.
If you read that review the major factor that hurt the Outlander was pricing because they chose the highest level Outlander. Pricing was a whopping 25% of the evaluation, the cheapest car got the most points (100), and the Outlander got last. Choose a V6 4WD Outlander without Nav and it would have been the cheapest, which would have put it neck and neck with the RAV4 for 1st place.
You really need to drive the vehicles. A review like that has so many subjective factors that it can become humorous why one vehicle wins over another. For example, they tout the RAV4 mileage, when in fact it was only 1mpg better than the Outlander.
Go drive 'em all at least a couple of times.
Car sites and magazines make living off car advertising and they are not always objective or consistent. I am more interested in ratings by real-world owners. Real-world owners don't market or sell cars, instead they buy them paying hard earned dollars, so I have more trust to a 100 of real people who bought a car and drive it for a few months, rather then to one magazine “expert”, who drives a brand new car from dealership just for an hour and who sometimes wants to please its biggest customer-advertiser.
For instance the comparo you mention puts RAV4 and CR-V ahead of the Outlander, but the real world owners give the Outlander higher ratings consistently throughout all three major consumer rating sites:
MSN Autos:
2007 Outlander - 9.5
2007 RAV4 - 8.6
2007 Honda CRV - 9.3
edmunds.com:
2007 Outlander - 9.2
2007 RAV4 - 8.9
2007 Honda CRV - 9.1
Yahoo Autos:
2007 Outlander - 4.5
2007 RAV4 - 3.5
2007 Honda CRV - 3.5
Ummmmmmm, yes. My wife sits back there all the time for trips longer than 30 minutes because she can watch TV while I drive. Never heard a complaint about comfort. We also loaded it up with 4 adults and 3 kids for a 1200 mile round-trip. I did hear complaints, but they were more of the "are we there yet?" variety after hour number 5.
Yes, magazines make money from advertising. No doubt about it. Do you have any proof that their comparos are swayed by how much advertising / money is given to the magazine for advertising purposes? This is a pretty strong claim, basically saying their reviews are bias. I'm sure I am not the only one who would like to see some proof. Personal opinion does not count.
As for sales, consumers seem to think the CR-V and RAV4 are a better bet to purchase, since their sales figures just trounce Mitsu's for 2007.
CRV : 218,160
RAV4: 172,752
Outlander : 14,190