Crossover SUV Comparison

nxs138

You don't have to justify your purchase to the rest of us. If you like your FS, that's all that counts, but to some people (like me), value is not the main reason in buying a car--heck, if I wanted value, there are lots of minivans that offer better use of space at a better pricepoint than the FS--but I personally am a stickler for interior quality, safety, and looks, which I found lacking in the FS. The new Taurus X is a nice improvement, I'll have to take a looksie whenever it shows up at dealers.

bobw3

Just did a 600 mile weekend trip, 90% highway and driving 70-73mph while on the highway and returned 26mpg. What are other CUVs getting real world? I normally get 20-23mpg with suburb driving.

prosource1

'You got a great deal on that trade-in...a fully loaded 2004 EX has a trade-in value of about $15k, so you got $4k more. Amazing. Are you sure the dealer didn't make up that money on your new car? '

I traded it last August. And no they didn't make it up on the new Pilot. The only reason I traded is because the gas crunch was forcing Honda to reduce prices and I got a loaded Pilot for $29995. That's $6,000 below MSRP. They reduced these in-part due to an increase in dealer cash Honda was giving its dealers. I only learned about this thru Edmunds.com. After hitting up 5 dealers, I finally found one who would do the deal many others dealers were doing around the country. I probably will never find another deal like that on a vehicle like a Pilot again.

[Deleted User]

Wow, someone may be touchy defensive? "Beloved Veracruz"?? It's not a vehicle I have any interest in buying, thank you.

Yes, the 500, etc. triplets got a 5 star rating from NHTSA. However, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety had the following finding for the 2006 models: When tested without optional side airbags installed, the Ford Five Hundred, Ford Crown Victoria and Chrysler 300 all earned ratings of "Poor" in the Institute's side impact tests. However, the 500 earned the best possible rating of "Good" and was named a Gold Top Safety Pick by the Insurance Institute for overall crash safety when tested with the side impact airbags installed.

Please understand I have no emotional investment in any of this. It is all just information.

arumage

Actually, Hyundai beats out most of its competitors in initial quality, and is improving leaps and bounds in dependability study. It's recent offerings are among the top in safety. The new plant in Alabama was in the top 10 plants in quality out of 73 plants worldwide in its first year of operation. The Veracruz isn't being built there though. Hyundai and Kia hardly the companies they were even five years ago. I guess that's why I don't quite understand your statement below. "I guess if you don't mind sitting at your Dealer waiting for parts or just waiting to get your vehicle back a couple times a month for the next ten years, well then maybe yes they do carry a fair warranty." :confuse:

That all being said... I truly enjoy the driving experience of the CX-9. I'm going to drive a Freestyle soon, just for comparison. I like the fact that I can get a used one with low miles for an awesome price since they depreciate so fast. Regardless of what I buy, I'll most likely be driving it until the wheels fall off so depreciation isn't an issue. It's more an issue of quality and longevity.

joe97

In addition to the above poster, when Hyundai USA implemented the 10/100 warranty program in the late 90s, sales rose by the folds. More importantly, repair costs were reduced by more than half. Hyundai wasn't just throwing it as a marketing term, clearly it knew of something Perhaps its cars are actually good and the company stands behind them...just a thought

kenym

I have no interest in either Hyundai or Kia so I don't know anything about the stats you mentioned. My only experience with either of thees vehicles is that I have several friends who have had bad and similar experiences with there vehicles. One is about four years old and the other two are a couple too three years old. They all said the same if you have the time and don't mind sitting at the dealer every month they will fix them but they wouldn't buy another one or recommend them to anyone. Didn't mean to upset anyone just my observation and 2 cents. :shades:

arumage

My own personal bad experiences have been with GM products, especially the 1995 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme SL (warped head at 130k and numerous problems inside and out before then). My sister-in-law and my wife's uncle (uncle-in-law? )have fairly new Sonata's that have been bulletproof. 2005 and up has been where Hyundai and Kia have really come into their own. I don't really think I'd ever buy a Hyundai model before then.

nxs138

It's a bit vague to judge an entire car company on the experience of a couple of friends. Looking at CR, Hyundai has 4 out of 8 cars that are recommended, including the Sonata. Mazda has 5 out of 10, Nissan 6/12. On the american side, Ford has 5/18, Dodge has 1/13, Chrysler 1/7, Chevrolet 5/21. Volkswagen has none recommended, neither does Mercedes. Toyota and Honda do very well (almost all are recommended).

So as you can see, Hyundai is doing rather well, once you look at the overall picture.

And for those who don't like CR, I don't know where else to go to get reliability data!

kenym

You are absolutely correct. It's not fair to judge the company by just a couple opinions. The truth be told I just don't care one way or another about the Hyundai or the Kia. I am completely satisfied with my Toyota. I drove GM products for over forty years and lost my shirt with my last two GM vehicles. :shades:

vrm

I was not debating the IIHS crash test results but the superior ability of the Acadia in real world collisions.

Facts are stubborn things. The high tensile strength steel used in the Acadia is normally used in military vehicles.

Facts are stubborn things. The Acadia is a heavier and bigger vehcile than the Pilot. The laws of Physics apply here.

You will also get to the see the IIHS crash test results for the Acadia in the next few months.

carlitos92

Hmmm, you mentioned both "military vehicles" and "bigger and heavier" like there's some positive connotation there. :confuse:

Sounds like somebody needs to find a gently-used H2... :P

arumage

Heavier vehicles do not mean safer vehicles. I believe that lesson was learned quite some time ago when crumple zones were designed in vehicles. The vehicle takes the brunt of the impact instead of the bodies of those inside. High tensile strength steel is most needed over the top supports of a car like the boron steel the XC90 uses for rollover safety.

bobw3

FYI...Consumer Reports gave the Freestyle a "Recommended" rating in it's latest car review issue. And open circles for average in reliability. Not too bad.

[Deleted User]

And I don't believe anyone said it was a bad car. Like all the others, it has good and not so good atributes.

You pick and choose what works for you. You live with your decision...when you choose something you choose to give up something else. Those who get defensive and emotional suggest to me that they may be consciously or unconsciously regretful of their decision.

Choosing the Stylefree may not get you the latest or most desirable features, but you will get a roomy, servicable and relatively safe vehicle that will likely cost you less than any of the others in this comparison.

bobw3

Pretty intense response to my simple matter-of-fact post...what are you regretting

thegraduate

Are we going to call things by their real names, or are we coming up with "cute" nicknames for all of them...

The Hyundai VeryCrude maybe? The GMC Archaic? The Toyota Highpricer?

[Deleted User]

Fine with me. Whatever floats yer boat.

bobw3

Let's not go with nicknames, and try to keep this conversation above the 3rd grade level!

practical

Things I like,
- powerful engine
- transmission
- quietness
- roomy interior
- driving position and firm seat
- quick display of back up camera
- tiny footprint of the smart key

Don't like ,
- touch and feel of the steering wheel
- too soft/sensitive of the gas pedal
- most display are in red, light-blue or else may be better.
- shape and apperance of the side mirror viewed by a driver. instead of fully utilize the estate of the area, the mirrors look like a bowl, waste some space. can't describe it precisely. just imagine a 70%-full bowl.
- my test car is a black-and-white two-tone interior, reflects of the two side vent are on both mirrors.
- central armrest in the way of my elbow.
- handle or grip of the door should be positioned afterward in order to have a better control of the swing out.

Overall not bad, still in my list.

Sales insisted even though Edge and CX-9 share the same engine, but CX-9's is assemblied in Japan. That's, parts are shipped to Japan before they're put together.

thegraduate

Well, I'd heard "stylefree" one too many times, so I tried to level the field a little. Those comments were tongue-in-cheek.

barnstormer64

Well, I'd heard "stylefree" one too many times

I think it's perfect. It's for those of us who believe WE define our vehicles . . not the other way around.

thegraduate

Hahaha...So my car would be styled "according" to me!

carcom2

http://www.hyundainews.com/Media_Kits/2007_Models/Veracruz/Specifications.asp

Cargo – Behind 3rd row seats
6.5 cubic feet -

Sante Fe Cargo - Behind 3rd row seats - 10 cubic ft.

arumage

That data is incorrect... or Hyundai is terrible at measuring volume. Please see the pictures below.

Veracruz


Santa Fe

music287

I saw the Veracruz at the Cleveland show, though it was on a stand and I couldn't touch it. The cargo space behind the third row is miniscule; even less than the Pacifica. I'd say this vehicle is in the same size category as the Mitsubishi Outlander, IOW: small.

I've got an Enclave on order. More or less the same mpg as all the cuv's, great space and style, and with a 100K powertrain/roadside assistance warranty. A winner!

Jay

bobw3

I've got an Enclave on order.

How was your test drive of the Enclave. What did you think?

[Deleted User]

Depends on what you want or need. The Veracruz offers 3 rows of seating with decent leg room and cabin width, but less cargo space with all seats up. On the other hand, it is a foot shorter than the Enclave (which I agree is a winner). Some people might like the tradeoff of a smaller, more maneuverable exterior package, only giving up some far rear storage. The Santa Fe is another half foot shorter yet, and thereby more manweuverable and parkable.

For those who need to haul lots of people and luggage, the Enclave might be the way to go.

freealfas

And exactly what is the purpose of having a vehicle like this with no usable cargo area with all seats filled. It seems more than a little pointless, a foot in this class/size of vehicle is more than worth the tradeoff in useful storage space. To forsake that much cargo area is a design flaw if there ever was one.

arumage

It's enough storage for me. I don't often haul 7 with luggage. The Veracruz's turning radius is over 4 ft shorter than the Enclave (I'm sure it's even worse with the Enclave's optional 19" wheels). The Enclave is a pretty sweet vehicle in all fairness. I like it much better than the Acadia or Outlook. It's just a little more pricy than I can handle at the moment.

arumage

I guess a design flaw is in the eye of the beholder. Letting a vehicle nearly a foot smaller have the same leg room could be viewed as a design flaw as well... or letting looks fall to the wayside for utility.

freealfas

In reality how often does one run up against the shortcomings of a vehicles turning radius. Are you doing that many u-turns on tight sidestreets where this poses a constant problem. Turning radius is another one of those abstract numbers that unless you have specific circumstances that warrant a lower number(small driveway, tight road to house, etc.), the reality of day to day driving for 99% of people don't know the difference of one having 4ft shorter than another but they will dam sure know when they can't carry their friends/kids and items they will be needing other than in the laps of the passengers. Not having useful cargo space behind an occupied 3rd row to me in a vehicle of this type is a design flaw every way you look at it. It's pretty much the whole reason you buy this type of vehicle, they are useful people and stuff haulers plain and simple and to not provide option that is simply wrong.

Looks are subject to the whims and tastes of those looking at and are purely subjective. In the subjective world there is no right/wrong only opinion which is personal. With design there can be right/wrong as to whether the solution resolves the paramaters of the problem at hand regardless of the aesthetic employed.

bobw3

I disagree.

With the average family size of four, most people may not need to use the 3rd row on a regular basis, except to pick up a few extra kids for soccer practice, or to carry some extra friends to dinner. So having a large cargo space may not be necessary when all 3 rows are in use. It's the same with the Mazda 5 and Kia Rondo.

So if you don't have a cargo need when using the 3rd row, I'd much rather have the smaller vehicle. The key design feature (for me) is having the 3rd row big enough to hold adults.

tenpin288

In reality how often does one run up against the shortcomings of a vehicles turning radius

Let's see. How often do you go to your local mall/galleria/Walmart Supercenter, etc? They don't allow as much room in the aisles/rows/parking spaces as they designed for 20+ years ago.

[Deleted User]

It's all good.

If I was buying right now, I would go for the shorter vehicle, because it is my preference. I would never be traveling long distances with 6 or more people aboard (the passenger space would mostly likely be used around town or for day trips), so the cubic feet available would be more than enough for my purposes.

I prefer driving the smaller of my two vehicles for the maneuverability...and dealing with all the unskilled, lethargic, half-attentive, cell-phone talking American drivers who make bottlenecks without knowing it, take forever to do simple moves like turn a corner, get going when the light turns green), and often park part of their vehicle over lines into the next parking space, etc.

vrm

Carlitos,
You should review the *entire* thread before posting. Dont be a point n click random poster.

Yes, bigger and heavier are positive connotations for majority of the buyers.

arumage

In reality how often does one run up against the shortcomings of a vehicles turning radius

I have to take a sharp right when pulling out of my garage to get down the driveway, and I can tell a huge difference in my Intrepid and Camry when pulling out of my garage. There is 2ft difference between their turning radii (37.6 vs. 35.4) The difference between the Acadia and Veracruz is nearly 4ft when both are equipped with 18" wheels (40.4 vs. 36.7). For reference, the Freestyle's turning radius is 40ft, and the CX-9's is 37.4ft

arumage

Yes, bigger and heavier are positive connotations for majority of the buyers.

I've definitely seen people praising the size (length, width, height) aspect, but I don't think anyone, aside from you, praising the portliness of any of these vehicles.

bobw3

And there's the width, length and height of fitting it into your garage too! I have a Freestyle and I agree that the turning circle is big, but it still feels pretty nimble to drive and park...maybe because it's not too wide or tall.

Larger and heavier is definitely a negative factor to me, not a positive one when making a car choice. Give me the smaller/lighter exterior package any day. I don't think I've seen anyone saying "wow, my vehicle great because it's so long, or so wide or so tall" But you can sing praises on the interior space, such as legroom, which doesn't always equate to a larger exterior.

music287

bobw3,

Of course, I couldn't test drive an Enclave but we did drive an Outlook over hill and dale! My wife and I also took a close look at the Acadia and Outlook which we could get into at the auto show. Since the Enclave is more or less the same vehicle we've extrapolated our feelings towards the Enclave. ...and my wife has loved the styling since we saw the concept in 2006!

Jay

loach

I have to take a sharp right when pulling out of my garage to get down the driveway, and I can tell a huge difference in my Intrepid and Camry when pulling out of my garage.

Sounds like you have a side-load garage, Arumage? If so, I can understand being concerned about turning radius.

Everyone's situation is different. For a family of 4, I would probably get a two row CUV (or a 3 row CUV and not give a hoot about the 3rd row or storage space behind it). We're a family of five, so we're leaning toward the Acadia because we want middle row captains and the 3rd row and storage behind it will matter. If we were a family of 6, I might have to just stick with a minivan.

arumage

The Freestyle is very lightweight considering its size. That is definitely a plus for it in my book.

arumage

I have a side-load carport attached to my house where I park the cars and a 2 1/2 car garage straight ahead of the driveway (not attached) where my tools and toys go.

I can definitely understand why you wouldn't want 3 kids across the middle especially if you have a decent age range. Sitting that close together for long enough could definitely cause some arguments. :P

freealfas

"Let's see. How often do you go to your local mall/galleria/Walmart Supercenter, etc? They don't allow as much room in the aisles/rows/parking spaces as they designed for 20+ years ago"

That's a function of the driver not the turning radius of the vehicle most of us are driving short of all but the largest(i.e. excursions and such). And I get in and out of shopping/parking garages few times a week and NOT once has the seemingly limited 40' turning radius of my FS caused me to have to make extra maneuver's to accommodate this fact. As I noted short of tight driveways and poorly conceived garage approaches you will NEVER notice a larger turn radius in 99% of the day to day driving people do.

loach

That's exactly why we have the captains in our current minivan and why we want them in the CUV that will replace it. We have a 15 year-old girl and 8 year-old boy in the captains. The 12 year-old boy is banished to the 3rd row behind the girl because he thinks annoying the 8 year-old is great sport.

tenpin288

That's a function of the driver not the turning radius of the vehicle

Not quite true. I currently own an 05 Tucson and drove a PT Cruiser before it. The specs for each are remarkably close in almost all measurements(wheelbase, length, weight, etc). The PT is listed with a turning diameter of 36.7 ft to the left (no listing for the right, must be only driven by Nascar racers!) The Tucson is listed at 35.4 ft diameter. As a result I can easily get into and out of spaces with my Tucson that caused me headaches in the PT. That includes work parking, parking garages, shopping centers, etc. The Tucson is just easier to park and it is virtually the same size as the PT.

I guess in your case in your area they haven't downsized the parking spaces the same way the newer centers have done around here.

arumage

You must have nice parking at your parking garage because every person driving a larger SUV at our mall's parking garage has to back up, pull forward, and back up again to get out.

freealfas

My FS is not a large SUV hence I'm having no problems.

arumage

Hehe! Thanks for the laugh. You can call it an SUV, CUV, or whatever, but it's still a large vehicle with a large turning radius. A new Suburban's radius is 43ft BTW.

[Deleted User]

However, the FS has some of the same "maneuverability" numbers as some larger SUVs. The FS is about 200" long with a turning circle of 39.7 ft. The Tahoe is 202" with a tc of 39 ft even. The Toyota land Cruiser is 192.5" with a turning circle of 39.7. The Dodge Durango is 201" with a tc of 39.9.

You can find plenty of large SUVs with even bigger numbers than the FS. But the FS is not as maneuverable as some of its competition. If you have tight parking spaces in your ramps, a tight turn out of your garage, etc., as others have pointed out here already, that larger turning radius will make a difference. Great to hear it isn't a problem for ya.