Suzuki Grand Vitara vs Subaru Forester vs Hyundai Santa Fe vs Jeep Liberty vs Ford Escape vs Saturn

paisan

I rack up ~30-40K between my 2 cars every year. My '91 XT6 just turned 130K when I sold it. My '00 Trooper has 42K miles. When I traded in my '97 Rodeo in '00 it had 120K miles trouble free on it. I just bought a '92 SVX with 70K and plan to keep it at least 10 years @ 20K/year miles. In the same vane my 2nd job is a computer consultant and I often do jobs on nights and weekends. When I get in my car or truck I need to turn the key and go. I don't have time to fiddle around with warranty repairs or un-expected breakdowns. For me the car must turnover and be ready to drive 50-2000 miles at any given time.

I guess I'm from a different time/mentality (and I'm only 28) where you don't just buy a car to "use and throw away"

-mike

dindak

Consumer Report's isn't bad, but don't be fooled by their lack of advertising=non-bias claim. Bias is something people themselves carry and to say that the CR reviewers aren't biased simply absurd. The best way to get a good idea about a car/truck is to read as many reviews from as many sources as possible, test drive it yourself and come to your own conclusion. I know people that made a car purchase decisions purely on the advice of CR and ended up not happy. I'm sure they are not the only ones who have done this.

daveghh

Dindak,
Besides the CR comments, the rest of their data (ie. the circle indicators) is based purely on numbers....

lark6

Wife's current car a '91 Accord with 177K miles.
I traded in a '93 Buick LeSabre with 127K on my '00 Forester.
Prior to that I had an '86 VW Jetta with 148K before it got totaled. I will give you that I had to replace the entire drivetrain in that VW before 100K except the transmission, as well as much of the electricals, which left a bad taste in my mouth for VW.

45K on my Forester, hope to get much more.

Ed

ateixeira

My last car was totalled at 107k miles, so I may have gone a little longer. I had it 7 years. My wife's car was also 7 years old when we traded it in, and it had I think 74k miles? I think that's more typical.

But the median age of a car on the road is 8 years IIRC, so lots of folks own cars well past their warranty, even the 100k ones.

paisan: that was actually JD Power's Durability Study that put the Trooper near the top. But CR also rates them very highly, giving it the coveted red dot.

Every reviewer has some bias. Edmunds was very forgiving of the many squeeks and rattles on their Highlander, the one tested in the recent comparo. They said it was a press car and basically called it an anomaly.

But if it had been a Kia, they would've been all over it, I bet.

-juice

scape2

Granted, the Escape/Tribute had one heck of a rocky start. But, if people would actually read the recalls they will see it was only for certain build lots/dates of Escapes. This is why I purchased my 2001 late in the model year. Get out on the net. There are plenty of other car sites along with sites to review and read reviews of people who actually own Escapes/Tributes. I am confident you will see for yourself the Escape/Tribute is a reliable vehicle. I personally don't trust CR anylonger. I have read enough here in the Edmunds chat room about CR to classify them as bias and aiming towards a target segment of readers.. The Escape/Tribute with its V6 along with its styling/handling and real SUV ability to tow are just a few of its strenghts..

paisan

Funny you put in "real SUV ability" It's all POV, what can it tow, 2500lbs? 3K? talk to a guy in an excursion who can tow 10K and he'll laugh at you, or compared to a civic that can tow 0K it looks like a lot! Glad you are happy with it though.

-mike

paddler23

I just made a decision to purchase a Jeep Liberty. The vehicles listed are not in the same category as the Liberty. I did consider other vehicles as well, including the Nissan Xterra, Honda CRV and Land Rover Freelander (and some others). My decision to buy a Liberty was based on need to tow a small travel trailer, need for 4WD (winter conditions-skiing), desire to go off road (fishing) and desire for manual transmission with 6 cylinder engine and willingness to sacrifice some a car-like ride features. Of the vehicles being compared to the Liberty here - the Escape and the Santa Fe have a 6 cylinder engine but both make you have an auto tranny and Ford have really limited the off road capabilities with the rear suspension system. Actually my second choice was a Nissan Xterra; other than that I would have bought a pickup truck. Again any comparison has to be based on your needs and of course - bank account!

ateixeira

V6 + 5 speed = Bliss. I agree that the others really need it too.

I'd at least like to see Hyundai put a 5 speed auto in the SF, given the Sedona minivan has one.

-juice

navigator3740

Dindak is right. The problem with CR is that their surveys are filled out by amateur critics. You may get 100 survey samples, but half of them are probably tainted by bias of one type or another. I admit to some validity, and I read them, but I don't totally rely on them. Too many times, their survey results don't match my product experience. I have to conclude that they're not more than about 50% on. Not very scientific.

jimbob17

I've owned six cars so far. The first four were all kept over 15 years. The Chevelle, Monterey, Monza and Subaru GL. The Monza almost made 20 years. I don't remember the mileage but they were all at least 150,000.
I traded them in because of rust or lack of parts.
I expect the Escort and Forester will both last at least 15 years.
As long as you have one old for local travel and one late model for trips you can keep them a long time. I know 15 years is old but I don't make cars a personal statement I use them for transportation but I sure did enjoy driving the manual shift cars.
Besides its nice to go years without a car payment.

zmeenow

I tow nothing... I bought the Tribute simply because I wanted an suv this time and not a sedan or coupe.. the tribute had about the right balance of qualities I was looking for.. at about the price I wanted to pay..I wonder whos getting these 3-4 yr leases at 12-15 thou a yr?? They're pushing the Americam auto business along...extremely popular. I buy I dont lease... but I do like to have a car thats worth something to either sell privately,or trade..so that I'm not making
$500/month car payments on a new car.

terminator2

Who is this guy scape2. I am telling you BEWARE!!!
I have purchased my Tribute feb 2002 and it has
stalled several times. I have several friends who
have also purchased ford escapes 2001/2002 and
have experienced the suvs stall on them.

Currently there is an investigation with nhtsa and
mazda to force a recall on all escapes/tributes.
I would NEVER reccomend a ford again.

dindak

Unfortunately like any set of statistics, CRs numbers are no always reliable. Cross section of studies / data is always needed to come to a better conclusion.

clever1

Consumer Reports suffers the same problems with research methodology as any other "scientific" reviewer. Statistically, 100 survey responses is not that significant of an indicator -- better than just one, but certainly not something to base a well-rounded, intelligent decision upon. Anyone who has dealt with statistics knows how easy it is to "bend" the data to support a foregone conclusion.

Also, the people who take the time to fill out surveys almost always represent the extremes of satisfaction or, more often, dissatisfaction. If CR is predominantly or exclusively surveying their own subscribers, that adds another glitch, since the demographic for those who bother to pay for (not just read fully or excerpted) their publication is not necessarily representative of the general population of product owners/shoppers.

One other reason I take all surveys with a massive grain of salt is that "point systems" themselves carry the bias of the surveyor -- who gets to decide how many points cupholder placement carries versus transmission design?

My main problem with Consumer Reports is that they assume shoppers always value pricing and certain convenience features over new technology. You've probably heard the saying about the word "assume".... Might as well ask Grandma for her opinion and leave it at that.

Ultimately, CR does their research about the same way any independent marketing company does research. They may not take ad dollars, but they are fully vested in maintaining a large readership for income. So the issue returns to "who spends money on CR and what keeps them happy"? Maybe we should survey their audience... oops! Almost forgot to ask: How many points is "happy" or "fun" worth?

suvshopper4

Until someone comes up with a proven better analysis method, probably with larger sample sizes, CR will be the main source for this data. It's that simple.

Of course, we could get all the manufacturers to release their data, and we could put it all together for direct comparison.
Right, that'll happen.

clever1

It's not a matter of coming up with a "proven" better analysis method, it's a matter of selling one. That's partly my point.

Yeah, it would be great if manufacturers released their own unabridged data.

scape2

I am just telling you my experiences with the Escape/Tribute. Get out on the net yourself, visit other chat rooms, visit other sites that have owners review their vehicles. You will see the Escape/Tribute are not as problem prone as a few here like to keep spreading. Find the site with over 4,300 Escape/Trib owners. Less than 1% have had this stalling problem AND including any other major problems to force them to trade or use lemon laws. I have come across now 11 people who own either Escapes/Tributes and NONE have had these stalling issues or major engine/Transmission failures some speak so highly of.
Piasan, the Escape/Trib tow 3,500lbs, not 2,500..
Mine has been great, performed flawlessly and am now averaging about 22MPG in mixed freeway/city driving. I use mine to tow my two water craft, go fishing/hiking in the beautiful North West.

suvshopper4

Even if we accept your "less than 1%" figure, how many would that make that have the same problem?

paisan

still no "great" towing as compared to an excursion @ 10K lbs. It's all perspective...

-mike

lark6

What do you have to tow that weighs 10K pounds? A couple of backhoes?

Ed

paisan

Because he was saying how the Escape had "real" SUV towing capacity, and I said it's a matter of POV.

As anyone who tows on a regular basis knows, you really only can realistically tow about 80% of the "suggested" towing capacity as your std. load. So 10K would be about 8K, etc.

-mike

ateixeira

Maybe T2 writes for CR? LOL.

Just kidding.

-juice

navigator3740

suvshopper wrote: "Until someone comes up with a proven better analysis method, probably with larger sample sizes, CR will be the main source for this data. It's that simple."

You're right. Or, we could make up our own minds based on our experience. I buy what I like and what has been good to me. I do shake my head at those (and my brother in law is one) who buy STRICTLY on what C/R says on every major purchase, down to a can opener. He just bought a Toyota Tacoma, based on C/R ratings. Never mind that it's uncomfortable, or slow, or dull, or the least fun to drive, (and I'm not saying that necessarily), they got the ratings, they get the sale. Same with his Crown Vic. Best rated big car, he wanted a big car, that's what he bought.

I'm wondering what mentality causes this phenomenon. It' keeps C/R in business.

mtngal

If you won't say that the Tacoma is uncomfortable, slow, dull and the least fun to drive, then I will. Only I'd put it as the MOST uncomfortable vehicle I've ever owned! If CR rated it highly then I would question their ratings, too!

I've also found that just because one model might have mechanical problems and get panned (thinking about the Jeep Grand Cherokee during a couple of years) doesn't mean that other models made by the same manufacturer might not be fine (the Cherokee and Wrangler those model years seemed to have few problems). So just because there have been problems in the past with JGC models shouldn't stop someone from considering the Liberty.

np1908

May be I am stirring a pot here, but here are my views.
CR reviews come out as opinions (even though statistics could be driving some of that). And I would rate any opinion as what is worth for. Just an opinion. I haven't seen any statistics associated with CR arriving to that opinion (may be I haven't looked hard?). Recently I happened to look at CR and their reviews are kind of favoring Toyota/Honda. Odyssey, we all know, had terrible problems with it's tranny and power door -- still it is recommended as a Best buy/recommended.. Tacoma is one more example for Toyota. Either the CR reviews are wrong or as dindak said before, the way by which the statistics were got are wrong..

JDPower just reports the statistics (read no reviews). I kind of favor that more than CR reviews.

ateixeira

Actually, CR didn't give the Tacoma a glowin evaluation, they just reported that their data for it showed it was reliable.

In fact, in the 2001 Buyer's Guide, it is the lowest rated compact pickup, period. They rated it only "Fair", which is a score so poor they rarely even award it. The Excursion is the only pickup to score lower, in fact.

So the two of you may have unintentionally give CR a plug for accurately pointing that out.

-juice

lark6

paisan: No harm no foul.

I see the Excursion as an answer to a question that nobody asked. I wish I could say the same for the Cadillac and Lincoln versions of Chevy and Ford trucks and SUVs.

Ed

ateixeira

Excursion failed but will be replaced by a more car-like stretch Expedition (it'll even have an indy rear!).

The Blackwood also failed.

I think you can get too big/too pricey, so I'm glad the market proved you need utility and a reasonable working size to be successful.

Tahoes are selling like hot cakes, though.

-juice

np1908

I have seen people rate Tahoes as one of the GM's best trucks!

baggs32

I've posted this a few time before but I don't remember posting it in this thread. Anyway, here's what USA Today had to say about CR back in March of this year. I found it very enlightening. Others did not.

http://www.usatoday.com/html/money/autos/2002-03-12-crcars.htm

suvshopper4

You mentioned your b-i-l bought a Crown Vic, based on it getting the highest rating.
That reminded me that in the past 2 weeks, I've seen 3 late-model-looking CVs in apparently good shape that were blowing blue smoke.
Purely anecdotal, not statistically sound, I know. But, as I see few good-shape cars blowing smoke these days (strict emissions tests in NJ), it made an impression on me.

By the way, thanks for saying my favorite words.

suvshopper4

In that article, GM's Akre took issue with the results, because JD Power's initial quality Survey differed from CR's reliability scores.
Doesn't he know that they are two different things?! Seems like spin-doctoring to me. I'm not going to take his word on what is a statistically valid sample.

Oh, and I gotta love that the mini-ute CR rated highest for '02 was the RAV4!
What's that? Wrong topic? Oh, excuse me.

clever1

"David Champion, director of Consumer Reports' auto test division, says there is no bias."

Oh, really? On what planet?

He also is quoted as saying, "Yes, maybe our readers are not a complete demographic cross-section of the U.S population, but at 500,000 that is pretty close." How stupid does he think people really are? Throwing around an unqualified figure like that reminds me of Dr. Evil chuckling and rubbing his hands, demanding "one MILLION dollars".

navigator3740

I've noticed the same thing, almost always on a taxi or police car. Properly maintained, those 4.6L engines run forever, but forever is about 150,000, then they can begin to have issues and need a rebuild. The Crown Vic doesn't change much so it's easy to see a 10 yr old one that looks good, and still looks fairly new, but could have been around the world already.

bess

Sorry, but most modern engines do not require anything close to a 'rebuild' at 150k miles.. Sure maybe a waterpump or a sensor here or there, but thats a far cry (and far cheaper) from having to 'rebuild'.

Look at your own vehicles. Have you owned vehicles with 150k+ miles that required the engine to be rebuilt?
If you replaced your vehicle prior to 150K, why? Was the engine repairs starting to cost more money than you wanted? Was the reason repair related at all or just that you wanted something different (which isn't bad, I've done that a few times as well).

The only assumption I make is that the owner changes the oil at manufacturer recommended intervals.

mtngal

about many (most now?) engines lasting well over 150,000 without being rebuilt. Even some of the older ones lasted that long - that '88 Nissan Hardbody that we sold with 290,000 miles received rather indifferent care during it's life. It was over 6 years old before it got regular oil changes (before that my husband was a bit hit-or-miss about the intervals). The engine was still in excellent shape (tranny only was toast) - it had an oil leak at one point, and there were a couple of other fairly minor problems with it during the 11 years we owned it.

azeal

Not to stir the pot further... But this debate is exactly why publications like Consumer Reports are valuable.

If a person comes here seeking straight advice on various models, what they will find instead are folks advocating for whatever brand/model they have a soft spot for. People who love Subaru's advocate for them, people who love Jeeps advocate for them, people who love Hondas do the same, etc...

If vehicle XXX gets a bad review, off course folks who bought that vehicle and love it will pan CR.

If I'm sinking $20k into a purchase I like to have the best advice I can. Is Consumer Reports perfect? Not even close. Is there any other resource available that does any sort of systematic review of the problems various makes/models of cars have? Nope.

Should anyone base their purchase entirely on CR? Nope. But if the 100 (for example) vehicle owners (people just like you and me) turned in their surveys and the tallies show that model's repair costs, reliability, gas mileage, etc... stinks, it's a fairly decent bet that there is at least a bit of truth in it.

paisan

When it was first envisioned by Ford it was/is built off the F250HD chassis, they meant for it to be a crew truck sold to utility companies and road crews etc. But at the same time the "lets see how big we can make a consumer SUV" competition started, so they figured what the heck.

We see how far that went.

I've found that entry and exit to the 2nd row of seats is horrible in it because the B-pillar is too far back, has anyone else noticed that?

Now to get this On Topic, I didn't have such a problem getting into the 2nd row of the Forester and Escape.

-mike

clever1

azeal: Certainly you understand the difference between a magazine that claims to have "no bias" (actually trades on that point) and an internet chat that is designed to attract opinionated individuals who are willing or driven to share their thoughts. Effectively, in comparing Edmunds or any similar forum with Consumer Reports you've highlighted what little difference there is between an opinion poll and flawed "research".

Also, remember that CR is not the only resource for "systematic review of the problems various makes/models of cars have". Regardless, any "systematic review" is itself based on some level of bias (i.e., who chooses the criteria and establishes values and measures).

CR can be commended for being a popular source of reviews, but then you have to remember that people generally gravitate toward things that reinforce what they want to believe, not things that conflict. If something like CR is needed to give shoppers a warm and fuzzy feeling about their opinion or choices, great! Use it. If that doesn't work, something else probably will.

Ultimately, your point that Consumer Reports isn't any better or worse than most alternatives actually means that we agree.

paisan

The issue I take with them is not that they aren't un-biased, my issue is that they mis-represent themselves as being unbiased when they are in fact no more unbiased than most other car/review magazines.

-mike

stever

I've been a bit dubious about CR since they steered me wrong on a canoe in ~1974, but stories like "Toyota says it didn't buy the media" make me respect CR more than most of the other stuff at the newstand.



Steve

Host

SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards

azeal

The point I am trying to make is that there is no other source for the kind of information CR offers. No other source actually tries to track the problems a particularl make/model has over it's lifetime. You can find lots of publications that will tell you about performance, about initial fit and finish, and about how well the one single vehicle they bought held up (usually with impeccable maintanence).

What CR tries to do is evalute how vehicles fare over time based on the opinions of the people who own them. To me, that is a lot more valuable than a review in a car magazine where the amount of ad space the manufacturer buys is sometimes directly proportional to how well the fare in reviews.

Folks who are trying to track the actual performance of a vehicle over time before they plunk down a good chunk of their yearly salary on it are left with limited options. You have CR (which may not be perfect, but at least they try), or you have message boards like this one. I'd argue that CR is the best option you have got for this info.

CR was talking about the roll-over risks of truck based SUV's long before the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration had the courage to begin addressing the issue, facing lawsuits and anti-CR campaigns by automakers. I think you can whack Consumer Reports for being simplistic, and not always being terribly relevant to people, but I don't think it is fair to call them biased.

mtngal

I remember a number of years ago reading a CR review of shampoos. The one they touted as the best and most cost effective was terrible.

I treat CR and all the other reviews for what they are - someone's opinion, which is interesting but not the end-all. If you ever read reviews supposedly comparing all of the small SUVs they either don't mention the Wrangler or else pan it pretty significantly. And that's OK with me (a very happy Wrangler owner) because I didn't buy it for the same things they look at.

Another example - last summer I looked at midsize SUVs (briefly). Most of the reviewers I read gave the Explorer extra points for having third row seating. I could never understand why you should give it the nod over something that didn't offer it - they aren't the same thing and shouldn't be compared. I won't buy a vehicle with an extra row - I have a large dog not kids, so I want a flat floor (one of the reasons I didn't buy a Liberty when they first came out).

clever1

azeal: Just like Consumers Reports, you are certainly entitled to your opinon. However, you might want to do a little research on the subject of "bias".

oregonboy

I don't know why the majority of posters on this thread are BIASED against CR, but I think that you made excellent, logical points, which they attempted to devalue with their personal opinions.

For impartial product reviews CR is the best source that I know. (flame on)

-james

clever1

oregonboy: No one on this board has mentioned a bias specifically *against* CR -- it offers a quality reference among a variety of alternatives. Mike described this issue best: "they mis-represent themselves as being unbiased when they are in fact no more unbiased than most other car/review magazines." Can you prove otherwise? If so, have at it.

For example, even azeal writes: "What CR tries to do is evalute how vehicles fare over time based on the opinions of the people who own them." So, CR is better because it only reflects the *opinions* of its subscribers? Or, are those *opinions* more valid because they are comingled with "scientific" assessments"? You tell me.

No need for flaming here. It seems everyone agrees after all.

tidester

you might want to do a little research on the subject of "bias".

Do you know of any objective sources on the subject? ;-)

tidester
Host
SUVs; Aftermarket & Accessories

lumbar

This is interesting enough to draw me in--and maybe offer a somewhat different perspective.

CR is much better at evaluating that which can be quantified and measured--it's simpler; in a sense it's more "objective."

This leads CR to have a "bias" in favor of vehicles whose virtues are more measurable--space, safety features, repair records, mpg etc etc. Ergo, a preference for a certain type of Japanese vehicle typified by the Toyota Camry and Honda Accord.

To the extent a car has somewhat subjective virtues that require driver "feel" and may inspire a passion that would never come from an Accord or a Camry, the technocrats at CR are quite frankly lost. More often than not, cars in this category may be American--not exclusively, but often. While some of us love putting our foot on the pedal of a 5 litre Mustang, CR editors usually prefer to wonder about trunk space and how often it's been in the shop. And that's fine until subjective terms like "best" come into play.

At that point, what's "best" may be more a matter of what's important and measurable by them than what's important to me.

The practical Forester, for example, strikes me as a quintessential CR-type car, while a V6 Escape, which to me is a more fun to drive vehicle but has a recall hstory, would not be.

navigator3740

So, what you're saying may explain my "bias" against C/R, which I freely admit, in that they rarely tout a car I respect or like. This must mean they don't measure what's important to me in a vehicle, or the people they survey don't. Either way, it's of very little value to me in making a decision on a car, and consequently, anything else. Frankly, I'd rather do research this way, and listen to real people's opinions of the cars they own. That way I can tell if they're reasonable, or just idiots.