However, some posters mix up this issue with the regular paint chips caused by the road hazards.
Well, I don't want to get into the whole chipped paint argument on their behalf, but I think they mentioned over and over again that they understand about normal road hazards, and they specifically stated their chipping was not the same as that. They also pointed out that they owned several other cars and drove the exact same road without similar damage over many years...OK, maybe they are exaggerating since they are upset...I have no idea. But, from their words alone, they have clearly "proven" to me that there is some specific problem with the Outlander. ("proven" in quotes indicates only a theoretical state)...Anyways, got your point dodo2 and thanks for the response.
Consumer Reports: If they rate only the current model year, then I wonder how they can actually judge the quality over time? Still, I understand and agree that they have a good reputation.
J.D. Powers: I never knew much about the JD Powers rating system. Just know the name from their PR work which makes them seem very respected. Could be true or just good PR.
"Consumer Reports: If they rate only the current model year, then I wonder how they can actually judge the quality over time? Still, I understand and agree that they have a good reputation. "
Consumer Reports reliability ratings reflect actual owner's data on their vehicles. They send out an annual car reliability survey to subscribers and have received responses for about 1.3 million vehicles. These published surveys in their annual auto issue cover six years and show 16 different possible trouble areas.
IMO this data can give a prospective buyer a true picture of "quality over time".
Seems like every review on that Motherproof website is positive as well as written in a slightly annoying style. Very optimistic and motherly, but not much help in deciding which car to buy.
What's up with these so-called "internet sales" people in car dealerships. Are they somehow not able to handle email? or just trying to cherry-pick their emails for idiots who will negotiate based on MSRP?
Latest example (of several): Sent an email to Ventura Mitsubishi (California) asking for a quote on an Outlander. I gave clear details about the type of car I wanted.
Someone with email name "sgiangrande" writes back and says:
"we do have Outlanders i just need to know what model your looking for?"
But just below that one line, unsigned answer, my original request and detailed car description is clearly copied in their email to me...OK, maybe some sort of internet snafu or maybe sgiangrande's IQ is a little low today...resent the email with the car description copied agian...wait/resend...wait/resend...wait/resend...three days go by...no answer.
I have had similar experiences with MANY of these internet people at car dealers in California. A few exceptions, of course, but overall, I am now doubting the concept of getting multiple REASONABLE quotes via email. It seems that they so strongly prefer to play their "car dealer games" face to face that they just don't pay much attention to emails.
I've had a similar experience with Mitsubishi dealers in Utah. They seem way behind in the internet sales methodology compared to Toyota, Honda, Nissan, and Subaru. Of the three Mitsu dealerships I sent quote requests to, only one actually confirmed receipt. Then they sent me an email to make sure I received a quote that they never sent. One dealer never responded at all, and I had to call the other to get them to respond. Pretty weak.
Latest update: Honda dealers seem to be much more aggressive in using the internet. I have gotten two quick contacts and one phone call already. One quoted a pretty good price also.
Made the $500 down payment to have it relocated from Alabama to Carolina. Now I'm in that limbo period where I'm committed, even though I haven't actually written the big check yet.
Seems like the only legitimate gripes I've heard won't affect our intended use...
Right-swinging door: We live in a rural / suburban area of coastal NC. Whether I'm pulling into my driveway, parking at work, Sam's, Lowe's, Target, or a restaurant, We pull into a spot either forwards or backwards. We parallel park maybe twice a year. So when I get out of the drivers' door and need to retrieve something from the back, I actually want it to swing to the right.
No nav system: I have a Garmin Nuvi. Works great. One less thing to break on the car.
Boring car designed by computers with no human interaction (Motor Trend): I checked every option box but the DVD on this Limited V6 model. How could a lightweight, 4x4 mini SUV with nearly as much horsepower as my Yukon XL, a JBL subwoofer, an iPod input and 10 cupholders possibly be boring?
Chintzy warranty: My dealer, Stevenson Toyota of Jacksonville NC, adds a free lifetime powertrain warranty which covers not just the engine but CV joints, transaxle, 4x4 system, even the timing belt. For $1600, they up the ante with a lifetime bumper to bumper warranty. I'm still not sure if I'll actually need that, but leaning toward might as well.
Unresponsive electric steering: I haven't done the slalom between lamposts in a parking lot since I was 16 in my mom's Caravan. I think I'll be okay.
The styling doesn't exactly turn me on the way my '04 Yukon does, or vehicles which are no longer with me (97 Wrangler, 87 Z28, 79 CJ5), but I wouldn't say it's unattractive.
I have a 5x8 encolsed trailer (2500 lb max) which I originally bought for a cross-country move to hold the things we didn't want the movers to handle, and ended up keeping it. I use that thing all the time for hauling everything that's either too messy (shrubs, mulch) or too large (tractor, motorcycle) to fit in the Yukon. Towed behind the GMC, it's unnoticeable, but it will be perfect for the tow-packaged RAV4 for those trips to Lowes.
I'm the type who keeps vehicles for a while. The '00 VW Jetta it will be replacing we've had for eight years, so I should probably get that bumper to bumper lifetime warranty. I had every intention of driving that Jetta past 200k miles, but it just isn't large enough for our soon-to-be family of 5, even for my wife driving around town. There might be three seatbelts back there, but you can't fit three car seats abreast. So for us, the third row seat was yet another essential.
I test drove a V6 the dealer had on the lot. I was impressed by its speed. Having owned a Ninja ZX-11 at one point and being a Naval Aviator by trade, I'm not accustomed to being amused by the performance of economy cars.
So here it is; this is what we need in our secondary family vehicle, the short-hauler: 1) Room for two adults, three carseats, possibly four kids in the next two years 2) 25 mpg or better--one gas guzzler in the garage is enough. 3) Real 4x4 for possible winter trips to PA, and driving on beach in NC. 4) Strong engine and tow package so I can still transport big things with my trailer. 5) Price range: $25-40k, any brand with a reputation for quality (preferably GM, Honda, any German brand, Volvo or Toyota). 6) Not a minivan. Just a personal preference / abhorrance shared by me and my wife.
I compared the RAV4 to the X3 and the baby Rover and the cute-ute of the rising sun seems to come out on top for what I need. As a matter of fact, it seems to fit my needs without compromise. None of the other compact utility vehicles have the seating capacity, and the mid-size (MUVs?) don't get much better mileage than the Yukon.
Shop for your Toyota Platinum warranty on-line and you'll save at least 50% from what you mentioned. Various dealers in New England, KS, other places are referenced in other Toyota forums.
I looked at the CR-V and the Rav4; closest Mitsubishi dealer located too far away to consider the Outlander without first confirming an acceptable price via internet or phone...but the dealer in Venture CA was communication deficient.
Finally ended up buying a Nissan Rogue SL AWD instead. I will write a detailed review after a few more days of driving.
Your reasoning makes perfectly good sense to me. I too was looking for a smaller SUV (?) to replace my 2003 GMC Envoy. I don't put much stock in what the so-called experts say about any vehicle, the only true way to buy a vehicle is test drive and go look them over. I had read before I bought my Envoy that they were terrible, but I never had any problems with mine, I just wanted something that would go further on a gallon of gas, and I had good luck with past Toyota vehicles. I looked at just about all the smaller SUV's and for the money, I believe you could not do better then the RAV4. There are plenty of good cars to spend your money on, so go with your gut instinct. But in this size range, I would certainly recommend the RAV4. My 2 cents.
After reading just about evey review on the net, from www.motortrend.com to www.motherproof.com, I'm convinced the RAV4 will make a great vehicle for my wife to haul the boys around in. I'm not planning on trading the Yukon in till gas hits $10 a gallon. Barring it's Chevy and Cadillac twins, there's no vehicle that can do what it does as well as it does (maybe the Excursion, but it lacks the refinement). It's equally comfortable taking six adults out to a nice dinner, hauling six sheets of 4x8 sheetrock (hatch closed) home from Lowe's, or slogging through the mud in 4 Lo with the rear diff locked up. It's a young father / husband / homeowner's dream truck--as long as you don't mind paying $130 to fill 'er up.
Everyone knows gas is only expensive right now because of speculation. Like the real estate market in California, eventually, all markets which are so over-inflated will eventually burst. And the Saudis are doing their part to make that happen.
But it will still be nice to have a fuel-sipping SUV for running the family around town.
Well the RAV's in the garage; the old faithful Jetta has been relegated to the driveway. Surprisingly, the RAV fits perfectly in the VW's spot, with basically the same length and width, there's still plenty of room to enter the garage, access my toolbox and walk between the vehicles. The Yukon XL effectively cuts off the left side of the garage from door to wall. The vehicle drives nicely. Although it's powerful, four-wheel-drive, and black with bold 17" rims, it still seems a bit girly for some reason which I'm yet to identify (more so than the Jetta). Even though my frugal wife has implemented a house rule that one must grab the most efficient vehicle available (meaning it makes no sense for me to drive the 5.3L GMC to work when either of the foreign econocars will otherwise sit idle all day), every couple we know from age 25-55 has his and her vehicles. That's the policy I'm pushing. And nice as it is, the RAV is definitely hers. But I'm still very impressed that Toyota can get 269 horsepower out of a normally aspirated 3.5L V6. With 50% more displacement, my Yukon only has 9% more horsepower.
Yea, RAV4 has very nice V6 engine: powerfull and economical.
Speaking of horsepower per displacement ratio, one vehicle comes to my mind: the Mitsubishi Lancer Evo VIII FQ400. This 4 cylinder 2.0 Litre baby delivers 405 horses @ 6800 rpm. It gets to 0-60 mph in 3.5 sec: better then 6.2L V12 Lamborghini Murcielago, and better then ultra-exclusive $1.2 million Pagani Zonda which has the 6.0L V12 sourced from AMG by Mercedes-Benz.
As far as the RAV appearing "girly" to tireguy, I think that's true of all the mini-utes now. It wasn't the case before the new model CR-V, to me, with it's blocky, utilitarian design. Nowadays though, these small CUVs scream "MOM'S CAR" to me much more than any minivan.
RAV4s are definitely feminine, but I'd imagine those girly lines would blur when pulling a 3500 lb bowrider up a slippery ramp in 4wd, or romping through a foot of snow on the way to your hunting cabin on a road with no county service. Cute or not, it's got the capability I was looking for. And my wife likes it, so that's good enough. Incidentally, I found some videos on the net of people doing things in RAV4s that I might have hesitated to do in my previous Wrangler. It's amazing what you can do when you couple 4wd with traction control and a little ground clearance, even in a soccer-mom grocery getter!
You can make it a little less "girly" by taking the spare tire cover off... Certainly the latest generation is less feminine-looking than previous ones...I don't have a problem with it anyway.
I got 28.2 mpg on my last trip, with 3 passengers and luggage. The V6 RAV4 is the only vehicle I am aware of with that combination of towing capacity and gas mileage (though not simultaneously).
I've gotten 27 mpg in my V6 Outlander and it too can tow 3500 lbs. I seriously considered the RAV-4 when I was looking but the swing door doesn't do it for me. (they also were dealing good $ on Outlanders with a great warranty.) Otherwise the RAV was in the running.
OK, you are right, but I neglected to mention my 3rd criteria since it is unique to me: whether I can fit in it. I am 6'3" and long torso, so I am headroom challenged in most vehicles, but the RAV with its height-adjustable seat all the way down and telescoping steering wheel all the way up and out fits me nicely, plus I still have good upward visibility to stoplights and such. There are some other vehicles I can fit into, but my head is so near the ceiling that I have to hunch over just to see if the stoplight has changed...unacceptable.
Please read my post nearby on MY '07 RAV4 defective airbag experience and my current Toyota customer (dis)service experience. You should drop Toyota from your list like a hot potato. Just my .02. Good Luck. :lemon:
I didn't see your post, but sorry to hear about it. Too late to drop it; it's in my garage. Every model has its tales of lemons, and I have pretty low expectations when it comes to dealer / manufacturer customer service.
So far so good. Wife loves it. And it's actually very quick--as you'd expect from a miniature vehicle with more horsepower than a 2000 Mustang GT. Splash guards and the trailer hitch make it look a little less svelte, but it's still girly. The JBL stereo rattles your teeth with its abundant bass, but it doesn't have the depth of the Bose system in my Yukon.
The right-swinging gate actually works out pretty well for us. The 18 month-old sits behind the driver, and the 3-year old sits in the right side of the third row (with the left seat stowed) so my wife doesn't even have to walk around the vehicle to secure them in their carseats.
Does your RAV4 have leather seats or cloth seats? does it have Yokohama Geolandar tires? Where do you take it for service? How do you wash it? How does the 4WD system work? Would you suggest the Base model with the V6 engine with steel wheels?
I have the same issue choosing between a 2009 Rav4 V6 sport and 2009 Outlander V6 XLS; I live in Canada and can get much better deal on outlander than Rav4 and personally like the outlander features more.
I was going to get the outlander until I did a test drive and realized some kind of high engine sound when trying to accelerate with outlander , I and my wife both notice this, It looked to me the engine does not have the enough power for the body to kick it so has to work hard! This never happened when we test the Rav4(very smooth and powerful engine), outlander dealer blame to engine not warm enough? But I did not buy it.
Has anyone notice this? Is this normal? If I did not have this experience I had the outlander now!
I have an '07 Outlander LS V6 and find the engine just fine when I punch it. Something must be very wrong with the XLS you drove. I briefly considered the RAV-4, but really got turned off by the swinging door with the tire on it. (parking in the city with a car behind you one could have a job getting stuff out of the back with the door in the way, as opposed to the low height fold down tailgate of the Outlander). For me, the lower price, super sound system and superior warranty of the Outlander had me drop the RAV off of my shopping list. The Hyundai Santa Fe was also on my list and might be worth looking at (it's a bit larger, weighs more and consumes a little more in gas, but also has a great warranty)
+1 for Outlander. XLS V6, no problems and plenty of power. Engine doesn't sound as refined as Honda V6 (our other car), but the whole package is much better than any other small to medium CUV on the market. Our other choice was Santa Fe as well.
No engine noise on my Outlander V6 XLS - It has plenty of power. RAV's V6 does have more horse power but that's about it - RAV4 was my distant second choice. The Outlander comes with the best package of features, styling, handling and warranty.
sataei, I drove a LS at a dealership in Quebec a few days ago. The ride was smooth, no strange sound although I forced it a bit. The engine responded quick enough and the transmission reacted remarkably smooth. Try another one. I preferred the Outlander for its extended warranty and its equipment. It has a few nice bling-blings, too. How reliable, not sure yet... For us as a family it's the best bang for the buck. Compare them thoroughly and choose whichever model suits you and your family.
Finally, I picked up my XLS last week and so happy with it. it took about 3 weeks dealer find one here in Toronto, it seems there are not enough XLS model left specially for certain colors like grey and black but he found a black one and it is really nice truck. The engine is very powerful and it is not like the one I tested before. Anyways, I am driving it now and so happy with my pick, oh and did I mentioned the sound system? It is insane!! I have not seen anything like this before it is better than my home theatre at home, the features are great, it has a great space for the passengers in the back and very comfortable, so glad to pick this over RAV4, RAV4 looks like a toy compare to this. So I got a better car, better features, better look, better Warranty and much better finance option than RAV4.
Thanks guys for all the input, it did really helped me for this pick.
My wife and I are looking for something a bit bigger than our current Mazda 3, now that we have an addition to the family. I'm trying to decide between the base 4 cylinder RAV 4 and a base 4 cyl Mitsu Outlander, probably 2WD for both. I'm in Canada, and pricing on the base models is relatively close, but the Mitsubishi has better financing options, warranty, etc. (we also considered a Mazda 5 but it felt a bit sluggish compared to the test drive of the 4 cyl RAV 4, and no stability control was the deal breaker--otherwise great car)
We'll be testing the Outlander later this week. I already know from the test drive of the RAV that the base 4 cylinder will be just fine for our needs. I'm unsure about the Mitsu though. Most of the reviews out there comparing the RAV and Outlander are all about the V6 models. Here's what I've gleaned so far... I don't care about the 3rd row seating, which isn't an option on the base of either 4 cyl model anyway.
base RAV 4 (4 cyl) + relatively powerful for a 4 cyl engine (179hp) + great fuel economy for a compact SUV + 2nd row seats fold flat + lots of Toyota dealers in our city, and the RAV is built here in Canada (service concerns?) + assumed Toyota high resale value + seemed relatively quiet during test drive - rear gate swings to the curb is a big turnoff - no other frills but that's base Toyota for you - financing options not nearly as good as Mitsu
base Outlander (4 cyl) + better pricing / financing options + very slick rear liftgate--impressive two piece clamshell design + heated seats standard, even on base (not offered on base RAV) + better warranty + road side assistance + includes tonneau cover and rear privacy glass (not offered on base RAV) - engine not quite as powerful or fuel-efficient as the RAV's 4-cyl - far fewer Mitsu dealers in area...wonder about future of Mitsu in general - resale value compared to Toyota? - concerns about noise and ability of the 4-cyl's CVT?
Thoughts? I'll have a better idea once I actually test drive the Outlander, of course. There must be others out there that were just looking at the 4 cyl base models of these two.
Have you considered a Mazda Tribute or a Ford Escape? They both seem to have the features you are looking for. We have a 2009 Ford Escape and we have been very pleased. Tribute and Escape are basically the same vehicle.
If you talk base models, you get anti-theft system and tire pressure monitoring in the Outlander, you don't have that in the base RAV-4. The Outlander has a bigger tank, and a smaller turning circle.
But if all things equals, even just the warranty will seal the deal for the Outlander. If you consider the pros and cons, the Outlander is more car for your money than the RAV-4.
I have heard of talks that Mitsubishi will close shop and leave the North American market, I have heard of such talks since ages ago. But look at the US now, it was GM and Chrysler filing for bankruptcy, not Mitsubishi. This is their company press release: http://www.mitsubishicars.com/MMNA/jsp/company/commitment.do
Also, if you will keep the vehicle for several years, you might find the difference in resale to not be that significant. Or it might even work against you. When I bought my '99 Galant, a comparable Camry was running around $3K more. After 10 years, using KBB the Camry is worth $2K more than my Galant (similar equipment, mileage, zip code). So that higher Toyota resale actually would have cost me $1000.
Regarding noise, I agree the Outlander's interior noise is more than I would prefer. Still, as you're in Canada, the heated seats might be worth it as a tradeoff for higher noise.
Other considerations: Do both engines use timing chains (good for life of the engine) or belts (need to be replaced every 60K miles or so)? Are there other maintenance considerations that would make one more expensive than the other? Is one drastically more expensive to insure?
Have fun with your test drive and be sure to let us know how it goes!
Needing towing power, I opted for the 6 cylinder and have been very pleased . The 6 speed tranny is smooth and I've gotten as much as 28MPG on the highway (usually around 20 around town and 25+ on highway with my 4WD LS model.)
While I haven't driven a CVT, the concept sounds a bit weird to me (keep the engine revving and vary the coupling, Sounds like it would be noisier)
I'm in the market for a Outlander SE fwd.I've received quotes from dealers for 26K, does this sound right. I thought the prices should be around 21 or 22K. What has been the experience of everyone during your buying experience.
An SE FWD in my zip code and with no options at all has an Edmunds TMV of $22463 after a $1K rebate. Options would drive that up, especially nav & rear-seat entertainment.
An SE as I would equipment it (F5, G4, FW, F6, GQ, GL, GS, and GD) has a TMV of $24079 after that same $1K rebate.
Is your price an out-the-door price (includes sales tax & all fees)?
Considering both. Any opinions appreciated. I'm worried about the seats in the CRV being comfortable on long trips. I've seen some comments on MSN Autos, Edmunds, KBB where the owners complain about seat comfort. Thanks in advance!
the 'internet sales' would give you a fairly lower quote to lure you into their showroom, when u got to their showroom, the sales on the floor would tell you the 'internet sales' work from home and they dont honor the quote they gave. 'there is MISCOMMUNICATION' and then you will have sit there listening to them for hours....
From experience, Toyota has the best manufacturing processes in the automotive industry and Honda is close behind. Toyota and Honda consistently rank very high in quality/reliability. I've read nearly every article in Road&Track, Car&Driver, Motor Trend etc. and they rank the CRV and RAV4 ahead of the Outlander. I recently bought a RAV4 and my 3 finalist were the CRV, RAV and the Subaru Forester. I downselected the CRV because the engine just didn't seem as responsive although the interior was nice. I didn't like the way the rear seats folded and the gymnastics with locking them in place when the Toyota is a one touch operation. The Subaru was nice but the base version's interior was cheap looking and feeling and my wife just didn't like it. I felt the RAV was a good blend of space, efficiency and my past experience with 2 4Runners with zero problems and the fact that the Subaru dealer just couldn't match the price of the RAV sealed the deal for me. I bought a base model with the extra value package (roof rack, tinted windows, mats and a few other things for under 21K.
I'm worried about the seats in the CRV being comfortable on long trips.
I had the same concerns, and test drove a EX-L and EX a couple times before I decided I could live with hte cloth. After a week of driving, they seem more comfortable every time I get in. On msot car, my left leg gest sore after an hour. Not the case with the CRV. The side bolsters are excellent. Might be narrow for a "wider" person.... but fits really nice if you have a <36" waist.
I don't like the RAV4 interior. It's too busy. They are trying too hard to make lower quality materials look interesting. Otherwise, the RAV 4 has more power than the CRV and quaity and reliability is very good. I've found the brakes on most Toyotas to be marginal. Not much feel and when loaded with passengers and luggage, they take a LOT of force ot stop the car with a newer Camry I drove.
The brakes and handling of the CR-V are what put it on top over the others. The Nissan Rogue was a close second, but visibility is poor and the back seat and cargo space is small. It's a little expensive for what you get.
AS for Mitsubishi? Well, the dealer network is pretty sparse outside of major cities and even then, you may be limited to 1 or 2 dealers. Not good for a car with average to below average quality (they used to and still do share a lot of Chrysler parts). CVT's and 4 cylinders can be a good combo IF, big IF, the engine is very torquey so it doesn't need ot rev like crazy. The Rogue is marginal... and that's a very storong 4 cylinder. I'd expect the Outland 4 cyliner ot be almsot as buzzy as the Compass or Patriot.
"you may be limited to 1 or 2 dealers. Not good for a car with average to below average quality (they used to and still do share a lot of Chrysler parts)."
Wow, did you do any research before posting your opinion on Mitsubishi, or it is just your expert opinion? We have about 20 Mitsubishi dealerships in Chicago metro area, if I can call it a major city. Ten years/100K powertrain warranty, and 5 years road assistance should help, if ever needed. As far as quality (which is one of the the highest in its class for Outlander by the way), this car is 100% build in Japan with 0% association with Chrysler or any of it's parts. It would be nice, if you could voice your opinion after reading any reviews, test driving the car, or actually talking with any real owners. Otherwise, enjoy your girly over hyped, owerpriced and underpowered She-R-V.
Comments
Well, I don't want to get into the whole chipped paint argument on their behalf, but I think they mentioned over and over again that they understand about normal road hazards, and they specifically stated their chipping was not the same as that. They also pointed out that they owned several other cars and drove the exact same road without similar damage over many years...OK, maybe they are exaggerating since they are upset...I have no idea. But, from their words alone, they have clearly "proven" to me that there is some specific problem with the Outlander. ("proven" in quotes indicates only a theoretical state)...Anyways, got your point dodo2 and thanks for the response.
Consumer Reports: If they rate only the current model year, then I wonder how they can actually judge the quality over time? Still, I understand and agree that they have a good reputation.
J.D. Powers: I never knew much about the JD Powers rating system. Just know the name from their PR work which makes them seem very respected. Could be true or just good PR.
Consumer Reports reliability ratings reflect actual owner's data on their vehicles. They send out an annual car reliability survey to subscribers and have received responses for about 1.3 million vehicles. These published surveys in their annual auto issue cover six years and show 16 different possible trouble areas.
IMO this data can give a prospective buyer a true picture of "quality over time".
Wow! Please send me an aspirin...that flame war gave me a headache!
Latest example (of several): Sent an email to Ventura Mitsubishi (California) asking for a quote on an Outlander. I gave clear details about the type of car I wanted.
Someone with email name "sgiangrande" writes back and says:
"we do have Outlanders i just need to know what model your looking for?"
But just below that one line, unsigned answer, my original request and detailed car description is clearly copied in their email to me...OK, maybe some sort of internet snafu or maybe sgiangrande's IQ is a little low today...resent the email with the car description copied agian...wait/resend...wait/resend...wait/resend...three days go by...no answer.
I have had similar experiences with MANY of these internet people at car dealers in California. A few exceptions, of course, but overall, I am now doubting the concept of getting multiple REASONABLE quotes via email. It seems that they so strongly prefer to play their "car dealer games" face to face that they just don't pay much attention to emails.
Seems like the only legitimate gripes I've heard won't affect our intended use...
Right-swinging door: We live in a rural / suburban area of coastal NC. Whether I'm pulling into my driveway, parking at work, Sam's, Lowe's, Target, or a restaurant, We pull into a spot either forwards or backwards. We parallel park maybe twice a year. So when I get out of the drivers' door and need to retrieve something from the back, I actually want it to swing to the right.
No nav system: I have a Garmin Nuvi. Works great. One less thing to break on the car.
Boring car designed by computers with no human interaction (Motor Trend): I checked every option box but the DVD on this Limited V6 model. How could a lightweight, 4x4 mini SUV with nearly as much horsepower as my Yukon XL, a JBL subwoofer, an iPod input and 10 cupholders possibly be boring?
Chintzy warranty: My dealer, Stevenson Toyota of Jacksonville NC, adds a free lifetime powertrain warranty which covers not just the engine but CV joints, transaxle, 4x4 system, even the timing belt. For $1600, they up the ante with a lifetime bumper to bumper warranty. I'm still not sure if I'll actually need that, but leaning toward might as well.
Unresponsive electric steering: I haven't done the slalom between lamposts in a parking lot since I was 16 in my mom's Caravan. I think I'll be okay.
The styling doesn't exactly turn me on the way my '04 Yukon does, or vehicles which are no longer with me (97 Wrangler, 87 Z28, 79 CJ5), but I wouldn't say it's unattractive.
I have a 5x8 encolsed trailer (2500 lb max) which I originally bought for a cross-country move to hold the things we didn't want the movers to handle, and ended up keeping it. I use that thing all the time for hauling everything that's either too messy (shrubs, mulch) or too large (tractor, motorcycle) to fit in the Yukon. Towed behind the GMC, it's unnoticeable, but it will be perfect for the tow-packaged RAV4 for those trips to Lowes.
I'm the type who keeps vehicles for a while. The '00 VW Jetta it will be replacing we've had for eight years, so I should probably get that bumper to bumper lifetime warranty. I had every intention of driving that Jetta past 200k miles, but it just isn't large enough for our soon-to-be family of 5, even for my wife driving around town. There might be three seatbelts back there, but you can't fit three car seats abreast. So for us, the third row seat was yet another essential.
I test drove a V6 the dealer had on the lot. I was impressed by its speed. Having owned a Ninja ZX-11 at one point and being a Naval Aviator by trade, I'm not accustomed to being amused by the performance of economy cars.
So here it is; this is what we need in our secondary family vehicle, the short-hauler:
1) Room for two adults, three carseats, possibly four kids in the next two years
2) 25 mpg or better--one gas guzzler in the garage is enough.
3) Real 4x4 for possible winter trips to PA, and driving on beach in NC.
4) Strong engine and tow package so I can still transport big things with my trailer.
5) Price range: $25-40k, any brand with a reputation for quality (preferably GM, Honda, any German brand, Volvo or Toyota).
6) Not a minivan. Just a personal preference / abhorrance shared by me and my wife.
I compared the RAV4 to the X3 and the baby Rover and the cute-ute of the rising sun seems to come out on top for what I need. As a matter of fact, it seems to fit my needs without compromise. None of the other compact utility vehicles have the seating capacity, and the mid-size (MUVs?) don't get much better mileage than the Yukon.
Any comments?
-Thanks
Finally ended up buying a Nissan Rogue SL AWD instead. I will write a detailed review after a few more days of driving.
After reading just about evey review on the net, from www.motortrend.com to www.motherproof.com, I'm convinced the RAV4 will make a great vehicle for my wife to haul the boys around in. I'm not planning on trading the Yukon in till gas hits $10 a gallon. Barring it's Chevy and Cadillac twins, there's no vehicle that can do what it does as well as it does (maybe the Excursion, but it lacks the refinement). It's equally comfortable taking six adults out to a nice dinner, hauling six sheets of 4x8 sheetrock (hatch closed) home from Lowe's, or slogging through the mud in 4 Lo with the rear diff locked up. It's a young father / husband / homeowner's dream truck--as long as you don't mind paying $130 to fill 'er up.
Everyone knows gas is only expensive right now because of speculation. Like the real estate market in California, eventually, all markets which are so over-inflated will eventually burst. And the Saudis are doing their part to make that happen.
But it will still be nice to have a fuel-sipping SUV for running the family around town.
The vehicle drives nicely. Although it's powerful, four-wheel-drive, and black with bold 17" rims, it still seems a bit girly for some reason which I'm yet to identify (more so than the Jetta). Even though my frugal wife has implemented a house rule that one must grab the most efficient vehicle available (meaning it makes no sense for me to drive the 5.3L GMC to work when either of the foreign econocars will otherwise sit idle all day), every couple we know from age 25-55 has his and her vehicles. That's the policy I'm pushing. And nice as it is, the RAV is definitely hers.
But I'm still very impressed that Toyota can get 269 horsepower out of a normally aspirated 3.5L V6. With 50% more displacement, my Yukon only has 9% more horsepower.
Speaking of horsepower per displacement ratio, one vehicle comes to my mind: the Mitsubishi Lancer Evo VIII FQ400. This 4 cylinder 2.0 Litre baby delivers 405 horses @ 6800 rpm. It gets to 0-60 mph in 3.5 sec: better then 6.2L V12 Lamborghini Murcielago, and better then ultra-exclusive $1.2 million Pagani Zonda which has the 6.0L V12 sourced from AMG by Mercedes-Benz.
As far as the RAV appearing "girly" to tireguy, I think that's true of all the mini-utes now. It wasn't the case before the new model CR-V, to me, with it's blocky, utilitarian design. Nowadays though, these small CUVs scream "MOM'S CAR" to me much more than any minivan.
Cute or not, it's got the capability I was looking for. And my wife likes it, so that's good enough.
Incidentally, I found some videos on the net of people doing things in RAV4s that I might have hesitated to do in my previous Wrangler. It's amazing what you can do when you couple 4wd with traction control and a little ground clearance, even in a soccer-mom grocery getter!
Certainly the latest generation is less feminine-looking than previous ones...I don't have a problem with it anyway.
I got 28.2 mpg on my last trip, with 3 passengers and luggage. The V6 RAV4 is the only vehicle I am aware of with that combination of towing capacity and gas mileage (though not simultaneously).
(they also were dealing good $ on Outlanders with a great warranty.) Otherwise the RAV was in the running.
(dis)service experience. You should drop Toyota from your list like a hot potato. Just my .02. Good Luck. :lemon:
So far so good. Wife loves it. And it's actually very quick--as you'd expect from a miniature vehicle with more horsepower than a 2000 Mustang GT. Splash guards and the trailer hitch make it look a little less svelte, but it's still girly. The JBL stereo rattles your teeth with its abundant bass, but it doesn't have the depth of the Bose system in my Yukon.
The right-swinging gate actually works out pretty well for us. The 18 month-old sits behind the driver, and the 3-year old sits in the right side of the third row (with the left seat stowed) so my wife doesn't even have to walk around the vehicle to secure them in their carseats.
I was going to get the outlander until I did a test drive and realized some kind of high engine sound when trying to accelerate with outlander , I and my wife both notice this, It looked to me the engine does not have the enough power for the body to kick it so has to work hard! This never happened when we test the Rav4(very smooth and powerful engine), outlander dealer blame to engine not warm enough? But I did not buy it.
Has anyone notice this? Is this normal? If I did not have this experience I had the outlander now!
I preferred the Outlander for its extended warranty and its equipment. It has a few nice bling-blings, too. How reliable, not sure yet...
For us as a family it's the best bang for the buck. Compare them thoroughly and choose whichever model suits you and your family.
The engine is very powerful and it is not like the one I tested before.
Anyways, I am driving it now and so happy with my pick, oh and did I mentioned the sound system? It is insane!! I have not seen anything like this before it is better than my home theatre at home, the features are great, it has a great space for the passengers in the back and very comfortable, so glad to pick this over RAV4, RAV4 looks like a toy compare to this.
So I got a better car, better features, better look, better Warranty and much better finance option than RAV4.
Thanks guys for all the input, it did really helped me for this pick.
cheers...
My wife and I are looking for something a bit bigger than our current Mazda 3, now that we have an addition to the family. I'm trying to decide between the base 4 cylinder RAV 4 and a base 4 cyl Mitsu Outlander, probably 2WD for both. I'm in Canada, and pricing on the base models is relatively close, but the Mitsubishi has better financing options, warranty, etc. (we also considered a Mazda 5 but it felt a bit sluggish compared to the test drive of the 4 cyl RAV 4, and no stability control was the deal breaker--otherwise great car)
We'll be testing the Outlander later this week. I already know from the test drive of the RAV that the base 4 cylinder will be just fine for our needs. I'm unsure about the Mitsu though. Most of the reviews out there comparing the RAV and Outlander are all about the V6 models. Here's what I've gleaned so far... I don't care about the 3rd row seating, which isn't an option on the base of either 4 cyl model anyway.
base RAV 4 (4 cyl)
+ relatively powerful for a 4 cyl engine (179hp)
+ great fuel economy for a compact SUV
+ 2nd row seats fold flat
+ lots of Toyota dealers in our city, and the RAV is built here in Canada (service concerns?)
+ assumed Toyota high resale value
+ seemed relatively quiet during test drive
- rear gate swings to the curb is a big turnoff
- no other frills but that's base Toyota for you
- financing options not nearly as good as Mitsu
base Outlander (4 cyl)
+ better pricing / financing options
+ very slick rear liftgate--impressive two piece clamshell design
+ heated seats standard, even on base (not offered on base RAV)
+ better warranty
+ road side assistance
+ includes tonneau cover and rear privacy glass (not offered on base RAV)
- engine not quite as powerful or fuel-efficient as the RAV's 4-cyl
- far fewer Mitsu dealers in area...wonder about future of Mitsu in general
- resale value compared to Toyota?
- concerns about noise and ability of the 4-cyl's CVT?
Thoughts? I'll have a better idea once I actually test drive the Outlander, of course. There must be others out there that were just looking at the 4 cyl base models of these two.
Thanks!
But if all things equals, even just the warranty will seal the deal for the Outlander. If you consider the pros and cons, the Outlander is more car for your money than the RAV-4.
I have heard of talks that Mitsubishi will close shop and leave the North American market, I have heard of such talks since ages ago. But look at the US now, it was GM and Chrysler filing for bankruptcy, not Mitsubishi. This is their company press release: http://www.mitsubishicars.com/MMNA/jsp/company/commitment.do
Also, if you will keep the vehicle for several years, you might find the difference in resale to not be that significant. Or it might even work against you. When I bought my '99 Galant, a comparable Camry was running around $3K more. After 10 years, using KBB the Camry is worth $2K more than my Galant (similar equipment, mileage, zip code). So that higher Toyota resale actually would have cost me $1000.
Regarding noise, I agree the Outlander's interior noise is more than I would prefer. Still, as you're in Canada, the heated seats might be worth it as a tradeoff for higher noise.
Other considerations: Do both engines use timing chains (good for life of the engine) or belts (need to be replaced every 60K miles or so)? Are there other maintenance considerations that would make one more expensive than the other? Is one drastically more expensive to insure?
Have fun with your test drive and be sure to let us know how it goes!
The 6 cyl timing belt is good for 105K/84 months(7 yrs), whichever first BTW.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_4B1_engine#Specifications_4
Needing towing power, I opted for the 6 cylinder and have been very pleased .
The 6 speed tranny is smooth and I've gotten as much as 28MPG on the highway
(usually around 20 around town and 25+ on highway with my 4WD LS model.)
While I haven't driven a CVT, the concept sounds a bit weird to me (keep the engine revving and vary the coupling, Sounds like it would be noisier)
26K, does this sound right. I thought the prices should be around 21 or 22K.
What has been the experience of everyone during your buying experience.
An SE as I would equipment it (F5, G4, FW, F6, GQ, GL, GS, and GD) has a TMV of $24079 after that same $1K rebate.
Is your price an out-the-door price (includes sales tax & all fees)?
I had the same concerns, and test drove a EX-L and EX a couple times before I decided I could live with hte cloth. After a week of driving, they seem more comfortable every time I get in. On msot car, my left leg gest sore after an hour. Not the case with the CRV. The side bolsters are excellent. Might be narrow for a "wider" person.... but fits really nice if you have a <36" waist.
I don't like the RAV4 interior. It's too busy. They are trying too hard to make lower quality materials look interesting. Otherwise, the RAV 4 has more power than the CRV and quaity and reliability is very good. I've found the brakes on most Toyotas to be marginal. Not much feel and when loaded with passengers and luggage, they take a LOT of force ot stop the car with a newer Camry I drove.
The brakes and handling of the CR-V are what put it on top over the others. The Nissan Rogue was a close second, but visibility is poor and the back seat and cargo space is small. It's a little expensive for what you get.
AS for Mitsubishi? Well, the dealer network is pretty sparse outside of major cities and even then, you may be limited to 1 or 2 dealers. Not good for a car with average to below average quality (they used to and still do share a lot of Chrysler parts). CVT's and 4 cylinders can be a good combo IF, big IF, the engine is very torquey so it doesn't need ot rev like crazy. The Rogue is marginal... and that's a very storong 4 cylinder. I'd expect the Outland 4 cyliner ot be almsot as buzzy as the Compass or Patriot.
Wow, did you do any research before posting your opinion on Mitsubishi, or it is just your expert opinion? We have about 20 Mitsubishi dealerships in Chicago metro area, if I can call it a major city. Ten years/100K powertrain warranty, and 5 years road assistance should help, if ever needed. As far as quality (which is one of the the highest in its class for Outlander by the way), this car is 100% build in Japan with 0% association with Chrysler or any of it's parts. It would be nice, if you could voice your opinion after reading any reviews, test driving the car, or actually talking with any real owners. Otherwise, enjoy your girly over hyped, owerpriced and underpowered She-R-V.
Unless the Mitsubishi comes with a manual, it is no more manly than the She-RV. Either one is a eunic without the clutch.
I'll just keep my 05 He-RV with a clutch and run circles around V6 powered SheUV's.
With 160 Hp and 4.450 lbs of gross weight, you shouldn't have any problems. As long as they are parked.