Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
To the original poster, if interested (and you may not be), check out the SUVs vs. Minivans forum. To do so, click this link, it will take you directly to it.
I was responding to Juice (ateixera) and made no reference or disrespect to your post so please stand down to alert level yellow. This was a joke referring to an old very gentlemanly disagreement we had between the two of us long ago, when I was still seriously considering the AWD Sienna. BTW, Juice and I are close - he even knows how much weight I've lost in the past 3 months so I'm sure he didn't need anyone to come to his defence. I was trying to be helpful, in part because as you say, the OP hasn't told us how many passengers and what gear they would be hauling. If he requires 3 rows and a long cargo area, my comments will hopefully be helpful. If he doesn't, I don't think I did any harm. For the record, we personally want AWD and I have lamented here before that I wish there were more AWD minivan options. The Sienna is the only deal in town, and up here in Canada models and options are limited and pricing exhorbitant. That's why I didn't get one as our city family hauler, well, that and the fact my wife doesn't want a minivan.
We may downsize to a *gasp* hatchback on our next ride though. Maybe Nissan will remake the Axxess by then. There's been a minivan here for two decades now (well, one per decade).
If anyone would like to challenge that based on the fact that I'm pro-minivan, meet me in the back-alley and we'll fight. I'll bring 6 of my large friends, since we'll all fit in the Odyssey. You can bring 4 big ones and a couple of kids in your crossover. I like my odds.
Tongue-in-cheek, of course.
TheGraduate.
I love the utility of a wagon or minivan with car line handling and reasonable gas mileage. The T-X slightly removes some of the stigma for a guy. I call it the "Daddy-wagon".
Oh, and the Taurus X is a super vehicle as well. Besides my family and kids loving to ride in the car, all my friends want to carpool with me when we go mountain biking. I can get six people and six big bikes on the car (four in back, two on top).
Thats the thing about the Freestyle and TaurusX. That rear-most seat third seat is usable by anyone under 6' tall. I've used mine that way. It really is 7-passenger.
Plus, I can carry a full sheet of 4'x8' plywood inside, hatch closed, and you can't. :P
Of course, you could probably tow my Sienna on a trailer, and there's no way I try the same.
grad: thanks for trying to defend me, but no need, volkov and I have had this gentlemanly debate for a while now, and he's always been civil and fair.
Having said that, a point volkov raised, here:
Cargo space is slightly less and is nowhere near as useful behind the 3rd row as the Suburban offers
Only reinforces the minivan suggestion. No crossovers can even come close to the amount of space behind the 3rd row of a van. Not even in the same league.
You may have to stack those suitcases, but you could probably fit several. Good luck getting ONE large suitcase behind a crossover's 3rd row.
HYSTERICAL - it's the same umbrella!
Honestly, with the pain going thru the economy, ask yourself: Do I NEED a New Vehicle. Besides, the deals will be sooooo much better in few months "down the road" [excuse the pun]. Car Manufacturers' tongues have only just begun to hang out of their mouths.
My Freestyle can swallow up a suitcase behind the third row seats. I know some other (Suzuki XL7, Higlander, etc.) crossovers can't. Freestyle is very close to a minivan capacity. TaurusX is the same. Flex is even better. The Flex is really a crossover that nails minivans right in the diaper-bag.
https://www.tituswillfordparts.com/images/FS Cargo Net.jpg
(I tried but it would not let me embed the pic in my post)
Pretty good for a crossover, but I'm not sure you could fit luggage for all 6/7 passengers.
I don't agree with the "close to minivan capacity" part, though:
Suburban: 45.8 cubic feet
Sienna: 44 cubic feet
Freestyle: 22.5 cubic feet
The van is close, but the Freestyle has about half the space.
Before volkov chimes in, the Suburban's cargo area has a longer floor than either.
Feel free to compare other crossovers...I'm tired of Googling them for now.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=132786/pageId=149- 505
Chevy Traverse: 24.4 cubic feet
Ford Flex: 20 cubic feet
So the Freestyle falls right in the middle of those two, but a Suburban owner would likely note the loss of space.
Ford Flex: 20 cubic feet
So the Freestyle falls right in the middle of those two, but a Suburban owner would likely note the loss of space. "
A lot of reviews (including Edmunds) got the Freestyle cargo space wrong with the 3rd seat up. They were not counting the "well" into which the FS 3rd seat goes when it is flat. I never understood how they managed that, but there were two different values floating around, one at about 20 ft, and the other about 23 or 24 (IIRC).
I mention this because I suspect the Flex (like the FS and TX), have a significant "well" behind the 3rd seat - and some articles may not have that space included. So your flex may be about 24 Cu ft back there as well.
Weird thing is some models with moonroofs lose cargo capacity, and you don't often (*) pile things all the way up to the ceiling.
* - I say that but I did that on a 10-day trip I just took from DC to Florida and back. We had 2 cars but the group split up so I took 6 passengers and all their luggage (2 big bags, 4 carry-ons, 2 boxes, and a garment bag and most of it fit behind the 3rd row so everyone had room to stretch out). I'm pretty sure I would have need to put the bigs bags on the roof of any crossovers discussed here.
One of my neighbors just traded her Suburban (one generation back) for a new Chevy Traverse and she's already wondering about the cargo space. Our kids are on the same b-ball team so I'll check it out after the next game.
I like the rough size of my Pathy, and I'm thinking new AWD crossover for my next vehicle. This will be my daily driver. I don't need a 3rd row - our family hauler is my wife's Acadia so if I end up with something with a 3rd row it will be folded flat 99% of the time. Don't suggest another Lambda - I like my Acadia but I'm looking for something a little smaller and more fun to drive. Probably won't go above $45k. My initial shopping list is as follows - purely based on looking at and sitting in vehicles at the auto show (no test drives yet):
1. Nissan Murano (seems like best overall value, like the styling but maybe not in love with it)
2. Acura MDX (styling has grown on me, heard it handles great but MPG seems unimpressive and not sure it's worth the extra $$$)
3. Several other vehicles vaguely on my radar, in no particular order:
- Ford Edge (haven't heard much good about handling/driving characteristics)
- Subaru Tribeca (odd interior and not in love with exterior)
- 2010 Chevy Equinox or GMC Terrain (intriguing, but who knows at this point)
- Hyundai Santa Fe (nice looking, good value, maybe too boring)
- Lexus RX (fun factor probably not there)
- Toyota Highlander (seems too much like a family hauler to me)
- Toyota Venza (seems like a Camry wagon to me)
- Mazda CX-7 and CX-9 (CX-7 too cramped, CX-9 too big - maybe I need a CX-8!)
- Mitsubishi Endeavor (blah styling and will Mits go the way of Isuzu?)
- Volvo XC90 (I doubt it - maybe the new XC60 or whatever it is)
- Volkswagon Touareg (crappy reliability history)
Thoughts? Suggestions?
Mitsubishi will not be leaving the US despite the rumors (pundits have been predicting the tri-diamonds departure for nearly a decade now).
Both of the above are fun to drive and have decent interior space and utility. While neither of these CUV's can claim to have interior materials quality that could compete with an Acura, they compare nicely to that of the Murano (in my humble opinion).
In the end, however, I feel that a decently lengthy test-drive will become the determining factor. So, go drive 'em all. You have a year, right? :-)
Think small and sporty, some ideas:
Saturn Vue Redline
Subaru Forester XT (turbo)
Acura RD-X
BMW X3
Practical is fine but you already have a Lambda, have some fun too!
I'd suggest a Venza, by Toyota, but it likely won't be a great handler either.
Infiniti EX 35 might be snug, but it is worth "trying on." Also check out the FX 35; they start in the low 40s.
For small crossovers (not the subject of this thread really), I prefer the Outlander or CRV, or maybe the Edge for a little more size.
The Escape Hybrid is a great rugged MPG crossover machine. New York taxi cab drivers prefer it because they are getting 30 MPG in city driving with it!
Now you will tell me that the TX is midsize, which of course it is. But it's not the style I'm looking for. I already have a 3-row wagon-like CUV in the Acadia. Don't want or need another one.
The only reason we Freestyle/TaurusX owners like it is because we have experience with it directly and we've already compared crossovers. You obviously have no experience with the Freestyle/TaurusX. Your ignorance is understandable, since Ford has never really advertised the thing much. Flex and Edge got lots of flashy ads. Maybe you should just get the vehicle with the most flashy ads, since you don't seem to recognize substance over glitz.
You really just need to read lots of car reviews by experts. Its kind of like leaving skin disease to a dermatologist. If you're not an engineer, an auto company will, and often has, sold people substandard vehicles. Like a lot of people, you shouldn't try to pick a vehicle yourself, if you care about getting it right.
The original title of the thread 6800 posts ago is completely irrelevant. I did a search on "Crossover" and this is what came up. Don't like it? Talk to the moderator but it's clear this is a very broad thread. You're just trying to drive me off it because I don't have your favorite wagon on your short list.
The only reason we Freestyle/TaurusX owners like it is because we have experience with it directly and we've already compared crossovers. You obviously have no experience with the Freestyle/TaurusX. Your ignorance is understandable, since Ford has never really advertised the thing much. Flex and Edge got lots of flashy ads. Maybe you should just get the vehicle with the most flashy ads, since you don't seem to recognize substance over glitz.
The Freestyle was one of 4 vehicles I test drove when I bought my Acadia (Acadia, Outlook, CX-9 and Freestyle), so don't tell me I have no experience with it. I actually liked it - it just wasn't my top choice. I don't want it. Get over it.
You really just need to read lots of car reviews by experts. Its kind of like leaving skin disease to a dermatologist. If you're not an engineer, an auto company will, and often has, sold people substandard vehicles. Like a lot of people, you shouldn't try to pick a vehicle yourself, if you care about getting it right.
Not sure why you're directing that at me. I do read a lot of car reviews when I'm shopping, but I would never let any "expert" pick out my vehicle. Instead I use them as tools to help narrow the field and identify vehicles I should drive.
Then why are you so interested in running me out of your precious thread? Anyway, please feel free to have the last word. I won't waste your time or mine responding to any more of your posts.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
1. Ride was a little stiffer than expected (wondering if the tires might be overinflated as I've had that happen at the same dealership when I bought my Pathfinder).
2. Visibility was better than I expected based on the reviews I read. Once mirrors and seats were adjusted to my liking I could see fine. My Acadia is harder to see out of than the Murano is.
3. I'm 6 ft even and I barely had enough headroom with the moonroof. Was fine for me but if I was 2 inches taller I probably would have had to tilt the seat back more.
Overall I liked it but I can't say it knocked my socks off. I'll definitely need to drive several other vehicles before I come to any decisions.
If this describes you, please respond to jfallon@edmunds.com by Monday, April 6, 2009 and indicate your vehicle's make and model.
Thanks,
Jeannine Fallon
Coporate Communications
Edmunds.com
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
I'm also very surprised that a rear view camera is not an option on this vehicle, even with navigation. Having been spoiled with one on my Acadia, I don't think I'll own another CUV/SUV without one. Could always add an aftermarket double-din nav radio with backup camera - might be a fun project.
Right now though I think I'd rank the Murano ahead of the Santa Fe on my list. I definitely want to drive the Venza (ok who am I kidding - I want to drive about 5-6 more vehicles at least).
What else?
You already mentioned the Venza. You may find it a bit soft, with isolated steering feel, as is common with many Yotas.
Maybe a Subaru Tribeca while you're at it. 5 passenger models actually cost less than the 3 row models, do, and the new 3.6l has more power and now runs on regular octane.
Keep us posted.
I test drove one but hated the electric PS. This coming from a Toyota owner.
In many ways we prefer the Forester. Better visibility and manual available. But my wife thinks the Toyota will have better reliability and lower maintenance cost and longer life. True? Forester rides betters. Rav4 v6 is awesome and smoother than 4 cylinder, but that inflates price and lowers gas mileage. A little more legroom in Rav4. Don't like the side-swinging tale gate, but like the full spare.
What do you think? Pros/Cons? Is 4wd/Awd worth it? Occasionally it would be nice, but most of the time not necessary. Are Toyotas cheaper to own and maintain?
We have an 09 Forester X Limited (non-turbo) and an 07 Sienna V6 with that same 2GR engine and U151E transmission.
Subaru wins the AWD battle by a long shot. I looked in to the Sienna AWD and reviews for the AWD system were only so-so and it mandated run-flat tires I didn't want, so I passed. We previously had owned a 98 Forester and the AWD system on that was excellent (overall reliability was also).
CR rates them very close, RAV4 by a nose comparing automatics, but their 5 speed manual Forester averaged an amazing (for them) 25mpg. That's nearly as good as the Escape hybrid's 26mpg, and much better than either with automatic.
I don't like the swing-out door on the RAV4 - you need a lot of room to open it plus it opens the wrong way (blocking the curb). That forced us to look at a Sienna and a Highlander.
Maintenance costs should be about the same. We actually got a Chase Subaru card and you can earn Subaru Bucks to pay for service, so to be honest I'm actually more concerned about the Sienna in that regard.
The V6 is a gem, the best selling point when we got our van. Love it. Fast, yet efficient. It made Ward's 10 best engines list and for good reason.
Surprisingly, though, the 4EAT on the Subaru is actually a lot more responsive than the 5EAT on our Sienna, which hesistates a bit to drop a gear. So the Forester responds sooner but the Sienna is quicker once you get going.
I'd say get a Forester and then sign up for a Chase Subaru credit card to hedge your bets and offset any fears of higher service costs, but IMHO that's a myth.
If you do get the RAV4, get the V6, which is nearly as efficient at the 4 banger yet more powerful. It should be a hoot to drive. CR actually rated the Forester XT (turbo) higher than the RAV4 V6, FWIW, but no manual is available on that model.
Good luck with either one.
The Toyota has handled everything three Canadian winters could throw at it and I'm pleased with its AWD performance (and I came from a Subaru before it, so I've tried both). The penalty for AWD on the RAV4 is so low (1-2 mpg) that I wouldn't even consider going with FWD in a northern climate.
I don't know about in the US, but in Canada the Forester would cost more to maintain simply because its service schedule requires more frequent servicing than the RAV4. However, this isn't in itself a good reason to choose one vehicle over another, in my opinion. I'd rather pay more to maintain the vehicle I actually prefer to drive than save on service but regret the purchase. Both Toyota and Subaru are known for a quality, long-lasting product. I'd recommend going with the one that suits you and your wife better without being overly concerned about a small difference in cost of ownership, if one even exists in your area.