Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Honda CR-V, Toyota RAV4 or Subaru Forester?

11011131516

Comments

  • tazerelitazereli Member Posts: 241
    I'm betting you haven't tried the Forester XT then. I just tried one last week as I'm getting in car buying mode. I tried a XT sport 5sp (i think thats correct )and my god was it a religious experience. i haven't accelerated that way since driving my college roommate's Trans Am. Only caveat was the premium fuel and compromised mpg. It has to be better than my half ton p/u. i haven't tried the Rav4 V6 and probably wont. i wont drive an auto, only stick. My wifes car is auto if i have that desire (2002 Forester). I'm actually comparing different Subaru's since I require 4 things.

    1. Power (i currently have a 1/2 ton v-8 stick short bed 4x4 and just like having a bit of power. Its not real fast but i love the torque)
    2. wagon type body (need to have something approaching the cargo capacity of the p/u)
    3. stick (replace a stick with a stick)
    4. AWD (have 4x4 now and wont go back to FWD as with my old civic)

    To me that leaves the WRX wagon, Forester XT, and Outback XT (i think they come in stick)

    not much out else out there that meets those requirements. any suggestions?

    Regards,
    Kyle
  • suvshopper4suvshopper4 Member Posts: 1,110
    My caffeine intake is under control, thanks.
    Maybe you could drink less of the kool-aid, juice? :P

    You introduced fixation into the conversation.
    You appear to be fixated on having the last word.
    Go ahead, have it.
    I'm done on this board.
  • etbull1etbull1 Member Posts: 15
    Fuel economy is just one of the reasons we are looking at trading in. I prefer driving smaller vehicles and don't really need the size of a minivan anymore. The smaller SUVs are about 15-20" shorter than the Odyssey. If we were to trade in, we would want to improve on the 20MPG we get with our 2003 Odyssey which is why we are not looking at full size SUVs.

    The forums have been great for researching vehicles, but I can't find a good site to compare road noise levels
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Your best bet is to drive them. Measured sound levels are often misleading. Whether the unit is decibels or sones, it is most often the sound quality that is most annoying rather than the actual amount of sound.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    I don't know of any comparison sites. I did stumble across this industry site touting asphalt - Quietpavement.com. The "how loud is loud" link is interesting.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Okay, I stand my earlier recommendation about test drives being the better way to measure. However, I recalled that the data is available here at Edmunds. Just go to the Full Test section of Inside Line and search for each of the vehicles. Below is what appears on the performance and specifications page.

    2007 CR-V
    Db @ Idle: 40.7
    Db @ Full Throttle: 72.5
    Db @ 70 mph Cruise: 67.1

    2006 RAV4 V6
    Db @ Idle: 42
    Db @ Full Throttle: 76
    Db @ 70 mph Cruise: 70

    2003 Forester (old review!)
    Db @ Idle: 72 (gotta be a typo)
    Db @ Full Throttle: 80
    Db @ 70 mph Cruise: 80
  • etbull1etbull1 Member Posts: 15
    thanks
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Nice digging Varmint. I wish that info could get added to the Comparison tool.

    The 07 Forester blurb there does say "too much road noise at highway speeds" under the ratings tab. Nothing about the idle.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    Even this data cannot be relied upon completely since, I assume, those tests would have been conducted on separate dates on different road surfaces. The 67.1 cruising Db for the CR-V seems especially optimistic --- that almost a Lexus-like noise level!
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Member Posts: 2,798
    Fuel economy is just one of the reasons we are looking at trading in. I prefer driving smaller vehicles and don't really need the size of a minivan anymore. The smaller SUVs are about 15-20" shorter than the Odyssey. If we were to trade in, we would want to improve on the 20MPG we get with our 2003 Odyssey which is why we are not looking at full size SUVs.

    None of these will get you a significant increase from the 20 MPG you are already getting. The CR-V stick can get 26 mpg in city mode, but they don't sell stick anymore. I have been getting 30 mpg on highway if I drove at or 10 mph above speed limit, but that was on pure gasoline with 2 oz of Acetone. The new Ethanol laces fuels yield very low mpg ratings, 27 mpg highway at most.

    I don't know about the 2003, but the new Oddysey uses noise cancellation electronics in the radio to make the cabin quiet, same technology as noise cancellation headphones, which generate anti-frequencies.
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    I averaged 27 mpg in my 5-speed Forester (which I would consider as a significant increase). However, the Forester isn't the quietest on the hwy and I'd be concerned about the rear leg room for your growing boys.

    -Frank
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Wheel bearings were a well known issue for the 98-02 models. In 03 they changed the design and started using Legacy bearings, which have been fine since.

    Actually, they retrofit to the earlier models, and that is the appropriate fix. Sounds like your dealer didn't have this information, as that problem should have been addressed at your first visit.

    Of course the V6 blows away your 2000 model, but we should be comparing the V6 to the XT turbo engine, not yours.

    Cheers. :shades:

    -juice
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Yes, Car & Driver has measured noise levels at idle, at 70mph cruising, and at 70mph coasting.

    They did it in past comparos of small SUVs. At the time, the Forester was the most quiet, but it's been a while, and they are due for an update/new comparo.

    I like comparos because you know they're measuring the noise levels on the same roads, and even on the same day.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Which is why I recommend test drives rather than magazine measurements.

    Not to mention the dB scale is rather quirky when it comes to representing loudness. At least one magazine promised to switch to sones (see here for more info), but I don't recall which rag it was or whether or not they actually made the switch.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Here's a strange observation - we were in Tucson visiting friend and they owned a new Ody EX-L.

    When I sat in the back, I noticed lots of noise, it seemed a bit loud.

    Later they let me drive it, since we're considering vans, and I didn't notice this as much.

    I wonder if it's the seating position itself, or perhaps the ANC (active noise cancellation) it tuned with the driver's seat position in mind.

    Any how, that's something instruments will simply not capture. Nothing like a test drive. ;)
  • 719b719b Member Posts: 216
    sometimes the type of noise or the pitch is more annoying than the db level. some noises are more annoying than others.
    some people hardly notice road noise made by tires, but wind noise will drive them crazy. that is why i feel a test drive would tell you a lot more than a magazine.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Heard rumors about a Stream being spotted in Cali. Are they bringing that over?

    I like the Mazda5 but they failed to execute in a few key areas (no 7 seat model, no seat back trays from the JDM model, engine could have more power).

    That would make a nice compact people mover.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    The one spotted in Cali was RHD. Probably just testing the car for release in another market. Remember the JDM Ody they had in the US while filming a commercial that aired in Japan? Could be a similar deal.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Yeah, saw that pic as well.

    Don't recall that commercial, but there's a diplomat who has a kid going to my son's preschool, and he has a brand new JDM Odyssey. I'll try to snap a pic next to it next time I see it.

    I kinda like those, they're more futuristic looking and make the US Ody seem a bit bland and boxy.

    Greener on the other side of the fence, I know... :D

    Check out this Blog for Subaru's possible entry in this segment:

    http://blogs.edmunds.com/Straightline/2657

    I would not be surprised if that photochop is actually based on an existing Honda, it seems so familiar.
  • bodble2bodble2 Member Posts: 4,514
    I saw quite a few of those on my recent trip to Hong Kong. Wish Honda would bring that to North America!
  • marig0107marig0107 Member Posts: 92
    we just tested both the RAV 4 in 4 cyl and V6 versions and the crv. The 4 cyl rav was garbage. I've never heard so much screaming from the front of a car to go up a hill...major oversight that dealer actually drove up that hill to do test drive...hello! That car stinks on hills.

    Then we tested V6 model and that had some major pep. But the seats weren't as comfy and roomy and the interior was lamost primitive. I had to stop looking at gear shift when I changed gears so I wouldn't goof. lol... Then we read a few reviews from consumers complaining about V6 engine so we lost confidence and began seriously looking at CRV. I really thought I was going to own a toyota and here I sit with a gorgeous CRV
  • oregonboyoregonboy Member Posts: 1,650
    The sales guy had you take the 4-banger up the hill first so that you would be all the more impressed by the 6-cyl. Too bad for him that the interior was a deal-breaker in either case. :P

    james
  • thecatthecat Member Posts: 535
    Then we read a few reviews from consumers complaining about V6 engine

    Where did you read about this. I've had mine for a year now and have absolutly problems at all. The new 3.5 v6 has won design awards, has goobs of power, gets unbelievable gas mileage, and is smooth as silk. I think somebody's pulling your leg. I will grant you that the base RAV's interior is pretty sparten but the limited is a vast improvement over the base.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Gotta agree, the V6 is on Ward's 10 Best list of engines. It's both powerful and fuel efficient.

    On the RAV4 boards there have been a few complaints about hesitation, but even then it affects more 4 cylinder models than V6s.

    Where'd you read about V6 problems? :confuse:
  • thecatthecat Member Posts: 535
    ooops .. should have said "absolutly no problems at all" in post 628
  • marig0107marig0107 Member Posts: 92
    sorry, I haven't answered. Been offline this weekend, but I want to say it was the yahoo forums that I read it in. I saw a few people mention this about the V6 and after driving a V6 van that gave me years of issues, it scared me a little. Then again, everyone finds their own experiences with different cars, but I am quite antsy now.

    I had a choice between the Rav and the CRV, ending up with the CRV. But both cars excellent enough to make it a really tough choice down to the wire for us! lemme see if I can find that forum...okay, it was the yahoo forum.

    Reading them again, there were few complaints, but maybe less than a handful on engine noise, transmission probs and slightly less pep on the engine.

    Still in all, I would not have been disappointed buying anyone of those two cars. Go ahead and check out yahoo forums. Those problems may never occur for you, but I am paranoid enough to think I'd rtaher keep my eyes and ears out for everything and nip any problems in the bud!

    My best to you with your car!
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Interesting. People seek out forums often just to complain, so maybe the complaints are over-represented.

    Toyota has sludge issues with the 3.0l V6, but as far as I know the 3.3l was pretty bullet-proof. The 3.5l is too new to say, but we haven't seen many complaints on Edmunds. I think the Avalon and Camry get more complaints than the RAV4 does.

    Cheers. :shades:
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    "Don't recall that commercial..."

    Probably because it aired in Japan.

    Honda had a JDM Ody here in the states while they were filming the commercial. However, the car was never intended to be sold here. They were just using our city street as a backdrop to make a film.

    I'm suggesting that the Stream sighting could be a similar story. Honda may have the Stream here so they can perform tests. This is probably much easier than trying to hide a test vehicle on the very busy streets of Japan.

    As for the Subie van, I've been a long time proponent of Subaru building a minivan.

    Their 2.5L boxer is a better mill for a micro-van than the 2.3L used in the Mazda5. However, I think a small van like that would encroach on sales of other Subarus. Besides, they need more mainstream offerings to support sales of all these niche products.

    It would be wiser to go full-size using the Tribeca platform. Subaru has always been good with safety, carving out interior space from a small package, and they have a reputation for practicality. These are all good things as far as minivan buyers are concerned.
  • tidestertidester Member Posts: 10,059
    People seek out forums often just to complain, so maybe the complaints are over-represented.

    Perhaps, but it doesn't make it any less of a problem for those experiencing one! :)

    tidester, host
    SUVs and Smart Shopper
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    I think a small van like that would encroach on sales of other Subarus. Besides, they need more mainstream offerings to support sales of all these niche products.

    It would be wiser to go full-size using the Tribeca platform.


    I agree 100%.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    A major concern I have is that Subaru doesn't have any 7 seaters under the $30k price point. That's a psychological barrier for a lot of folks.

    We're discussing this in other threads, and I guess they could do a lot of things:

    * a long wheelbase Forester with 3 rows (RAV4 does this)
    * a Mazda5 sized entry based on the new 104" Impreza chassis
    * base it on the Tribeca

    The last option would be the most expensive, though.

    RAV4 is sold as a short wheelbase model in Europe, no 3rd row offered. We only get the long wheelbase version.

    Given Toyota owns a chunk of FHI (and that should go up soon), they may not want the Forester overlapping with the RAV4, so that seems unlikely.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Bob - can they do it for a competitive price, though?

    I mean, the market just demands that. The Odyssey costs less than an equivalent Pilot. Even comparing FWD models.

    Can Subaru offer one for, say, $2000 less than a Tribeca? They'd have to de-content it quite a bit.

    The Impreza/Forester platform is probably too narrow for a big van, so it would have to be Mazda5 sized.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Toyota "could" increase their FHI stake, although they've so far said no. That could always change however.

    I think Subaru offering a minivan off their smaller platforms would be a mistake. The audience for that type of vehicle is MUCH smaller than those who want full-size minivans. My guess is the overwhelming amount of minivan sales are in vehicles $30K and above. Only for the Koreans, might that not be true—and if so, it won't be for long, as their prices keep rising.

    Bob
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Depends on what you call competitive. I think they could sell one in the Odyssey/Sienna neighborhood. Making a minivan smaller doesn't necessarily mean it will a lot cheaper. A lot depends on vehicle content.

    The bigger issue is this: Could they sell it in Europe, Asia, etc.? That's where the smaller minivan makes sense—and that could well be the determining factor, as Subaru almost always makes "world" vehicles for their core products, which this would be.

    If it's a North America-only model, then I say fullsize is the way to go. Otherwise they may be forced to go smaller, as they likely can't do a North America-speciifc and Euro-specific models. Maybe they could do a LWB and SWB of the same minivan, one for each market?

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I guess I just don't see how they could make it cheaper than the Tribeca if they base it on that platform.

    It's like Mercedes, with the ML350 and the R350. The R ended up costing a lot more. That seriously limited sales.

    If they only sell a few of them, and top it off it's only sold in the US, that would kill any hope for profitability.

    Remember something - Subaru sells more cars in Japan than it does in the US. Should they build a van for the US only? The van segment continues to shrink.

    A Subaru5 (Subaru's version of the Mazda5) would be in a much smaller niche. It could be based on the cheaper Forester, and use a fuel efficient 2.5l to help them meet future CAFE standards.

    The other thing is the current crop of minivans from Toyota, Honda, and Hyundai/Kia are very "mature", i.e. the formula is pretty much nailed down and Subaru could not compete with a quirky entry. It would have to match all of those feature for feature, and offer AWD on top of it all.

    Imagine how much that would cost. List would be $35-40k.

    That's my concern.

    Yet another - they don't have as much production capacity at SIA now that Toyota has moved in. I believe they have more flexible capacity in Gunma, Japan.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Why does it have to be cheaper than the Tribeca? That's a mid $30K vehicle, as are most minivans. Perhaps better stated is that the Tribeca and most minvans are in the same ballpark with one another in terms of costs. Same with the Pilot and Highlander; they all cost about the same as their minivan brothers.

    The only way they would make it cheaper than the Tribeca, would be for them to use the 2.5i engine, which I think would be a mistake—unless it were a Mazda5-sized vehicle (which I think is wrong for the American market).

    Having said that, it may very well be a smaller vehicle, simply because (as I stated) Subaru most likely will make it a vehicle to be sold in many markets. That usually means a smaller vehicle. Then again, maybe not, as the Tribeca is now sold in most if not all markets outside the US.

    Bob
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    I went to FitzMall to check on Sienna prices, and yes, they can be had for well under $30K. Keep in mind that won't be the case for many Toyota customers, as they won't likely have access to a dealer that prices vehicles like FitzMall.

    So I ask you this: if you had a choice of buying a Forester-based minivan or an AWD Sienna LE for $27,335 ($31,344 MSRP), which would you buy?

    As a point of reference here's the price of a 7-passenger base Tribeca at FitzMall: $30,637 FitzPrice = $30,637 / $32,680 MSRP. Why would a minivan, based on the Tribeca, have to be more expensive than this?

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    All good points, but let's remember something - the base Forester X starts at around $18k (I'll use street pricing for the entire post, to keep it apples-to-apples).

    Even if the stretch Forester has more content, it could potentially come in a lot cheaper than that $27k van. That's a $9000 spread. The Grand Forester, or Subaru5, or whatever you may want to call it, could start closer to $22k.

    Mazda5s are a good value. They sell for $18-22k, and the upper range is with leather and GPS NAV. That Mazda offers a good $10k price advantage over similarly equipped vans from Honda and Toyota.

    Also, the Mazda5 only costs a few grand more than the Mazda3 they're based on. Imagine the same super-sizing from an Impreza or Forester.

    I guess they could build a van priced the same as the Tribeca, though it would erode any profit margins because it would have to cost more to build. But that still doesn't resolve the capacity issue at SIA.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Do you really think Subaru could sell an AWD 7-passenger minivan—regardless of what platform it's built on, for $22K? I don't.

    And even if they could, it would likely cannibalize other Subaru sales that are in the same price range.

    You're talking about a Traviq-sized vehicle—and that flopped. Granted it didn't have core Subie DNA, but even so.

    As to the fullsize minivan market being "mature," you could say the same thing about 4-door sedans, and that hasn't stopped carmakers from building them—over, and over again... The fullsize minivan formula is so good that there is room for more players—if the product is right. Nobody has made a "sport" minivan (we have sport sedans), so if I were Subaru, that's what I'd offer. Or offer a diesel minivan, something that the other brands don't offer—just don't try to butt heads directly with the major players. Offer something slightly different—but fullsize, because that's where most of the customers are—and that's where the most potential for sales are.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I do think they could sell it for $22k (street price, list closer to $24-25k). Mazda manages to offer leather and GPS for that price. Delete those two and add AWD and VDC instead. Those are the two key things the Mazda5 is missing. And by the way it would likely be a 6 passenger.

    I'm talking a base model price. They would also likely have a Limited model that sold for a few grand more. Then a flagship LL Bean model with leather and maybe a turbo powertrain, still under $30k.

    I mean, they can sell an AWD Impreza 2.5i for $16k, and it would have the same basic powertrain as the base model.

    Traviq flopped in Japan, sure, but so did almost every other GM import sold there.

    I'm shopping for a people mover now, and while a reasonable amount of reserve power and torque is needed, I'm not looking for a "Sport" minivan. It would be too small a niche, even for Subaru.

    Also, at the same price as a Tribeca, it would basically kill the 5+2 model Tribeca. You may as well cancel that model, as the sport van would cannibalize it completely.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    You may be shopping for a people mover, but I bet that doesn't translate to most minivan shoppers. They want space—lots of it.

    If Subaru comes out with a vehicle as you've described I bet it will be a so-so seller at best. That's been the history of all small minivans, and I don't see that changing dramatically.

    Having said all that, I suspect Subaru will likely follow a plan more closely aligned to what you have proposed, than to what I have proposed. Why do I say that? They've got a long history of making somewhat questionable product decisions. Maybe it will work for them like the Outback and WRX did. Then again maybe it won't, like the BRAT, Baja, v1.0 Tribeca and SVX didn't.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Well, they do say they're switching to a marketing focus vs. an engineering focus, and I'm far too practical a thinker to have great visions for the future. ;)

    Maybe they will prove me wrong, but I see something like this drawing below (minus the air plane front and perhaps a tad bigger) making it to market globally, with few US sales:
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Well, that I can agree with. Market to the world first, and pick up whatever crumbs you can get from the U.S. market second.

    Maybe this is what the Forester evolves into? I could buy that idea—so long as they keep the CUV aspect. It won't attract many "traditional" minivan customers though.

    Bottom line: Whatever Subaru does it better leap-frog the competition, and not just play catch-up.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    That's just it.

    I believe they can leap frog the Mazda5 and Kia Rondo for a still-reasonable cost.

    I do not think they can leapfrog the Odyssey and Sienna and stay within a price range suitable for most people that walk into Subaru dealerships.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    It won't attract the Odyssey and Sienna crowd, so it won't matter. That's a different customer.

    I can see it leap-froging the 7-seat RAV4, by giving it a real 3rd-row rear seat to seat adults. If they can't give it an adult-friendly 3rd-row seat, it will be just another marketing mistake.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Maybe. If they go that route, then a stretch Forester would make the most sense.

    For whatever reason (perception?), you can charge more for an SUV than you can for a minivan. Pilot costs more than the Ody, Highlander costs more than the Sienna.

    Vans just get a bad rap.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    We are wayyy OT, here.

    But SUVs tend to be more than vans for two reasons: 1) they have AWD and 2) people in the US will pay more for the image/look.

    The trick for Subaru would be to keep AWD and not exceed the price point of the 2WD competition. The higher vehicles get in the market, the more elbow room for price manipulation. The extra cost of AWD (probably a $2K item) at $20K is a 10% price boost. At $30K, the same AWD is only a 6.6% hindrance. Plus, at $30K, they have lots of other places where they might cut costs, or add hardware to boost the profit margins.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    We're not OT if they base it on the Forester. ;)

    Here's my chop of a Grand Forester. The stretch would have to be longer than this, but just to have an idea...
  • tazerelitazereli Member Posts: 241
    That doesn't look half bad...I just fear the forester morphing into an overweight, no fun SUV like most of the rest.

    Juice: do you still have an inside track with the Cherry Hill crowd? i wonder what they have to say about a revised Forester.

    Kyle
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I have friends and contacts, yes, but FHI is so tight-lipped that even most of them didn't know much about the WRX and Tribeca before they showed up at the NYIAS.

    So info is basically non-existant for the 09 Forester.

    Major things to look forward to are the longer wheelbase (about 104" at least) and the ultra-compact rear suspension. The WRX' cargo area is much wider and the strut towers are far less intrusive. The 09 Forester should therefore have a HUGE cargo area. :shades:

    It'll finally get factory GPS, too. Check out the WRX to get an idea of what the interior will look like, much improved IMO.

    Still, I'd like to see it offered in 2 wheelbase lengths with a 3rd row option on the longer one. I doubt it'll happen, but I can dream.
This discussion has been closed.