Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

Hyundai Santa Fe vs Toyota RAV4 vs Mazda CX-7 vs Ford Edge

11012141516

Comments

  • Your right not a cracked block, but a cracked cylinder issue.
    GM did issue a "campaign" notice -- not a recall -- covering the 4.2-liter engine in a specific group of 2002 TrailBlazers, Envoys and Bravadas. It's bulletin No. 03019 dated June 2003, and it addresses the issue of cracked cylinder liners. Symptoms can include noise, poor performance, stalling and/or no engine restart

    GM stepped up to the plate though and extended the warranty on the engine to 100,000 miles.

    http://www.startribune.com/435/story/631692.html
  • hardhawkhardhawk Posts: 702
    I stand corrected. I guess mine had no problem as I never got such a notice.
  • good that you didn't! :)
  • defreitasmdefreitasm Posts: 152
    "Would anyone else agree that the Mazdas should now be considered the "girlie" Cabriolet of Crossovers?"

    Yes it's a girlie car...that's it!!! Most of us male CX7 owners have been trying to keep it hidden from the public but I'll admit it! I'm a girlie man driving a girlie car! My only regret is that that didn't have one in Mary Kay pink, but if I sell enough cosmetics maybe Mary Kay will special order one for me.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 13,795
    came close to renting an 'edge' today. enterprise wouldn't let it go for a day. got a free taurus instead. :cry:
    2017 Ford Fusion SE 2017 Ford F-150 Limited
  • chelentanochelentano Posts: 634
    I am in a process of getting new small-medium SUV. I drive 2 generations of Camrys. The new one came out with smaller trunk and no folding seats anymore, so I have to look at crossover SUV for more cargo space.

    RAV4
    Test drove RAV4. Very nice overall, but ugly back door opens to the wrong side. Hard to believe that Toyota which makes such refined cars refused to customize the door for American market. I frequently have to unload car on the curb so for me it's a huge negative factor, so for most people in urban areas.

    Mazda CX7
    CX7 uses premium gasoline and looks too squeezed and tight. So I am not even considering it. I do like the look of CX9, but it's a different price category.

    Murano
    Murano is nice but overpriced by about $7k vs. SF, RAV and Outlander.

    Santa Fe
    I have to test dive Santa Fe. Looks nice outside and especially inside according to pictures. It appears to be very well designed overall. It looks like this company made huge improvements lately, but I still have reservations about brand name – I wish they rebrand it.

    Outlander
    Test drove Outlander and, with exception of interior, which is probably not as great as Santa Fe, have to say that this crossover appears to me as the best value and the best car in this category. I was quoted by local dealer $22500 incl. destination for top of the line XLS. For this money you get standard: nice V6, 6 speed transmission sportronic with paddle shifters, bluetooth, 6 disk MP3 changer, ABS with power assist, all the airbags, active skid control, stability control, tire pressure monitor, climate control, leather wrapped steering wheel, unique flap folding tail gate, rear LED lamps, fog lights, tiny 3rd row seat, silver roof rails, keyless start, Fast Key!, odorless interior, 18" tires, 5/10 year warranty/roadside assistance… Besides everything it’s just best looking in this category and to me it looks better even then BMW X3 and Lexus.

    Available optional: Navigation, Sirius radio, Xenon headlamps, premium Rockford stereo with 30gb mp3 hard drive, leather, 4WD, sunroof, heated seats.

    Spear tire cleverly located outside under the trunk (see rear view pict.), which in addition to the aluminum roof make center of gravity low. Great crossover. Great handling, fun to drive. It currently outsells RAV4 in Japan 3 to 1.

    image

    image
  • joe97joe97 Posts: 2,248
    I hate to tell you but Hyundai's brand recognition in the US is much higher when compared to Mitsu. There is no reason to re-brand it, the SF has always been a good seller for Hyundai, and it still is.

    The Outlander is a good crossover but Santa Fe is just better in terms of...well, a lot areas. I spent behind the wheels of both CUVs for close to a month worth and found the Santa Fe to be the much better of the two. Oh suggestion to Mistu, please do-away with the third row. Thank you.

    The dealer offered you $22K for a loaded Outlander? Holy crap they are that desperate trying to get a sale? Speak volume about the dealer and where Mitsu stands in the US. The MSRP for the Outlander base starts just under 22K....geesh
  • tidestertidester Posts: 10,059
    I hate to tell you but Hyundai's brand recognition in the US is much higher when compared to Mitsu.

    That's a little surprising since Mitsubishi has been selling in the States a lot longer.

    tidester, host
    SUVs and Smart Shopper
  • chelentanochelentano Posts: 634
    I hate to tell you but Hyundai's brand recognition in the US is much higher when compared to Mitsu.

    Mitsu is old school brand. They have been winning Paris Dakkar rallies for years and the car is made in Japan.


    The Outlander is a good crossover but Santa Fe is just better in terms of...well, a lot areas. I spent behind the wheels of both CUVs for close to a month worth and found the Santa Fe to be the much better of the two.

    Santa Fe is a great car as it seems, I still have to test drive it, but does come with Fast Key or Paddle Shifters or Xenon/LED lights or 30 GB MP3 stereo or Navigation?

    Oh suggestion to Mistu, please do-away with the third row. Thank you.

    I don't need the third row but it's just there. It's tiny and obviosly it's a marketing gimmik.


    The dealer offered you $22K for a loaded Outlander? The MSRP for the Outlander base starts just under 22K

    22.5K. Apparantly they have special dealer incentive program, so MSPR does not tell us enough. Mitsu is a huge compay so they can afford to offer such great deals.
  • chelentanochelentano Posts: 634
    The Outlander is a good crossover but Santa Fe is just better in terms of...well, a lot areas. I spent behind the wheels of both CUVs for close to a month worth and found the Santa Fe to be the much better of the two.

    Santa Fe is a great car as it seems, I still have to test drive it, but does it come with Fast Key, or Paddle Shifters, or Xenon/LED lights, or 30 GB MP3 stereo, or Navigation, or Bluetooth???
  • joe97joe97 Posts: 2,248
    And the Santa Fe is made in the US - I don't understand the relevance stating the Outlander is made in Japan (??)

    Don't get me wrong, the Outlander is a good CUV. Both look pretty good on paper but in real-life, the Santa Fe is just better. The product (SF) speaks for itself, although some additional tech features would have made it even better.

    The state of Mitsu in the US maybe finally getting back on its feet (e.g. good product of Outlander and Lancer) after almost pulling out of the US (remember the 0% interest debacle, for example?). By the way, the Outlander version you speak of is MSRP for around 30K (depending on configuration of options). If the 22.5K offer was true, then I hate to say it, that was a desperation way to get a sale. A good product does not require more than $7.5K of incentives, eclipsing 25%.

    If you consider Mitsu to be a huge company, then where does Hyundai place on the scale? Seventh in the US, sixth in the world, is that enough to be called gigantic? ;)

    Back to Santa Fe vs. RAV4 vs. CX-7 vs. Edge :)
  • chelentanochelentano Posts: 634
    And the Santa Fe is made in the US - I don't understand the relevance stating the Outlander is made in Japan ??

    Joe, Japaneeze made goods are usually high quality. That's the relevance.

    Don't get me wrong, the Outlander is a good CUV. Both look pretty good on paper but in real-life, the Santa Fe is just better.

    This is just your general statement with no facts. Don't get me wrong SF is good CUV. I would say SF has better interior, and Outlander has better looking exterior. Both have great ride, handling, and warranty but feature-wise Outlander easily beats SF: Fast Key, Paddle Shifters, Xenon/LED lights, 30 GB MP3 stereo, Navigation, Bluetooth. These gadgets are not on paper - they are in real world Outlander I drove yesterday, but they are not available as standard or as option in SF.


    By the way, the Outlander version you speak of is MSRP for around 30K (depending on configuration of options). If the 22.5K offer was true, then I hate to say it, that was a desperation way to get a sale. A good product does not require more than $7.5K of incentives, eclipsing 25%.

    Nope. 22,5K offer, as I’ve said, was for the top of the line XLS model (2WD) with no exra options and it’s MSPR including destination is only $24,275. So please don’t invent 30K number.


    If you consider Mitsu to be a huge company, then where does Hyundai place on the scale? Seventh in the US, sixth in the world, is that enough to be called gigantic?

    Nope, not even close. Hyundai is tiny compare to big boys. Size of the company is usually measured not in number of bikes sold, but in market capitalization. Check out market capitalization in Billions of US dollars:
    Toyota 228
    Mitsubishi 125
    Honda 65
    Nissan 49
    Hyundai 15

    Lousy 15 billions...



    Back to Santa Fe vs. RAV4 vs. CX-7 vs. Edge

    Yea, Joe, now back to Santa Fe vs. RAV4 vs. CX-7 vs. Edge :-)
  • joe97joe97 Posts: 2,248
    Joe, Japaneeze made goods are usually high quality. That's the relevance.

    So are you telling me all of the Toyotas, for example, built in the US are inferior than those built in Japan?

    This is just your general statement with no facts.

    Features do not make the car better. That was the point I made.

    Nope. 22,5K offer, as I’ve said, was for the top of the line XLS model (2WD) with no exra options and it’s MSPR including destination is only $24,275. So please don’t invent 30K number.

    You weren't exactly clear in your original post regarding whether or not options were included - you posted everything, including optional features and the whole nine yards, no offense but it sounded to me like it was a sales pitch.

    And as for Mitsu's operation in the US, it has not been a successful one, especially the past decade or so. It has not captured its market capitalization nor has it grabbed additional shares here in the stateside.
  • chelentanochelentano Posts: 634
    So are you telling me all of the Toyotas, for example, built in the US are inferior than those built in Japan?

    Yes, Joe, I am telling you that. Partially for that reason Toyota keeps production of Lexus in Japan. Partially for that reason Mitsibishi was not doing well in US while being part of Chrysler and while building cars in Illinois.


    Features do not make the car better. That was the point I made.

    Of course they do. It’s just today features are not in Santa Fe’s favor.
    Speaking of features, I love that Fast Key in Outlander. I just touch a door handle with a finger and the door unlocks, while my key is in my pocket. Then I start a car with a knob and my key is still in my pocket. And I will never lock myself out. When I have my key and I step away form the car for 10 feet it locks automatically. That’s just one cool feature. You can get it as option in $32,000 Murano, but it’s standard in Outlander XLS for under 23K!



    You weren't exactly clear in your original post regarding whether or not options were included - you posted everything, including optional features and the whole nine yards, no offense but it sounded to me like it was a sales pitch.

    It’s offence, Joe, cose you are not honest. Actually I was very clear: That’s what I’ve said standard and what's optional:
    "I was quoted by local dealer $22500 incl. destination for top of the line XLS. For this money you get standard: nice V6, 6 speed transmission sportronic with paddle shifters, bluetooth, 6 disk MP3 changer, ABS with power assist, all the airbags, active skid control, stability control, tire pressure monitor, climate control, leather wrapped steering wheel, unique flap folding tail gate, rear LED lamps, fog lights, tiny 3rd row seat, silver roof rails, keyless start, Fast Key, odorless interior, 18" tires, 5/10 year warranty/roadside assistance… Besides everything it’s just best looking in this category and to me it looks better even then BMW X3 and Lexus.
    Available optional: Navigation, Sirius radio, Xenon headlamps, premium Rockford stereo with 30gb mp3 hard drive, leather, 4WD, sunroof, heated seats."



    And as for Mitsu's operation in the US, it has not been a successful one, especially the past decade or so. It has not captured its market capitalization nor has it grabbed additional shares here in the stateside.

    Sure, selling part of the company to Chrysler and building cars in cornfields of Illinois was not their best move for american market share. However, speaking of brand, Mitsu was the company who introduced the Model A, Japan's first series-production automobile back in 1917.
  • joe97joe97 Posts: 2,248
    First of all, please stop bolding everything you post.

    Yes, Joe, I am telling you that. Partially for that reason Toyota keeps production of Lexus in Japan. Partially for that reason Mitsibishi was not doing well in US while being part of Chrysler and while building cars in Illinois.

    Unless you have hard data to back up, you're simply making sweeping generalizations.

    Of course they do. It’s just today features are not in Santa Fe’s favor.

    And those should not be deal killers. Perhaps Hyundai did not feel it was cost-beneficial to add navigation units, for example. Take note it is offered in other markets, so I imagine it would not be too difficult for Hyundai to implement them into the US market. Maybe it makes sense for the voided item since less than 8% of total buyers opt for the navigation units, for example. The fact of matter is, the Santa Fe is a great CUV, with or without some of the omitted tech features. It sells very well because of such.

    It’s offence, Joe, cose you are not honest. Actually I was very clear: That’s what I’ve said standard and what's optional:

    Offence you say? If you were to tell us a quote you received, what was the point listing the items that are not part of the vehicle? Do you work for Mitsu or something?
  • tidestertidester Posts: 10,059
    cose you are not honest

    I don't think you meant to say that. A simple "I doubt it" would have sufficed.

    tidester, host
    SUVs and Smart Shopper
  • audia8qaudia8q Posts: 3,138
    So are you telling me all of the Toyotas, for example, built in the US are inferior than those built in Japan? Yes, Joe, I am telling you that

    I'm sure many of us would like to see the facts behind your statement....where can we find it?
  • chelentanochelentano Posts: 634

    > First of all, please stop bolding everything you post.


    All right, as friendly gesture


    > Unless you have hard data to back up, you're simply making sweeping generalizations.

    I wish in your previous posts you would provide some “hard data” to support your view on SF vs. Highlander, but you didn’t. You just made “sweeping generalizations” in regards to SF, but now you demand “hard data” from me. Japanese cars take market share away from American cars. That’s hard data. Check out JDPower ratings and you will find that Japanese cars generally have better quality/reliability. That’s hard data. Would you argue otherwise: would you say American cars generally have better quality/reliability? There are certain “sweeping generalizations” could be made without “hard data”: Swiss watches are better, then American, French wine is generaly better then American, though there is some good Californian wine. As for Toyota’s sold in US - they are only partialy Japanese. A lot of parts on this US made Toyotas made by the same vendors, who supply Ford and Chrysler. As result we hear lately about all these recalls issued by Toyota. That’s hard data. Have you heard about that many recalls for Lexus? Toyota builds Camry in US, in China and in Japan. Which one would you pick, if you have a choice of three and why? (hard data, please)



    > If you were to tell us a quote you received, what was the point listing the items that are not part of the vehicle?

    That’s hard data for your education. It seems at times you want to avoid hard data. I honestly listed standard features included in that quote. Then I honestly list optional features. Nothing unusual: people talk about standard and optional features all the time, but it happens to be inconvenient hard data for some, too hard to handle, since they realize they get less car for more money.

    > Do you work for Mitsu or something?

    Oh, so are you saying that any poster, who lists optional features, works for that car manufacturer? You simply don’t like the fact, that some Outlander’s features available as standard or as option, while on Santa Fe they are not available at all.
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    We have same discussion few months back, just check it out.
    In the end, those who liked Santa Fe more, didn't change their mind, same for the Outlander. Reason is - both cars are good value, nice designs, good quality, good warranty, etc. The difference is in character: Hyundai is a bit bigger, softer cruiser, while Mitsubishi has more features, better fuel economy, performance and sporty handling. You just can't beat eight times in a row Paris-Dakar Rally winner, with global recognition of true off-road performance and durability. Globally Mitsubishi is respected as much as Toyota and Nissan are. In the other hand while Hyundai is not there yet, it is not that far behind any more either. And such good products as Santa Fe, Sonata or Azera can only help. Few years back Hyundai was only cheap cars maker (with Mitsubishi's licensed powertrains), and look at them now: they are talking about future luxury car market attempt with their Genesis concept.

    As far as I know (from this forum) people are paying 4.5K to 5K off MSRP for Santa Fe and invoice For Outlander (1.5k-2K off MSRP), so you right "A good product does not require more than $7.5K of incentives". And yes, bad reputation of Mitsubishi in this country is strictly associated with Chrysler sourced transmissions in some of their products assembled in Normal, Illinois in the 80'. Of course we all know how good Excel used to be back then too...
  • joe97joe97 Posts: 2,248
    I spent a month on the Santa Fe and Outlander, is that enough for you? It was never a generalization - all I said from the start, after spending a considerable amount of time in both vehicles, while both fantastic, I felt the SF was a better overall vehicle. Both excel at certain areas, and comprised in others. My opinion based on in-depth testings.

    You, on the other hand, made a sweeping generalization b/c you perceived everything coming out of Japan is automatically superior than those from other parts of the world.
  • chelentanochelentano Posts: 634
    Well said, piast!
  • chelentanochelentano Posts: 634
    > You, on the other hand, made a sweeping generalization b/c you perceived everything coming out of Japan is automatically superior than those from other parts of the world.

    Nope, Joe, I've said "Japaneeze made goods are usually high quality." Usually - in English does not mean "always" or "automaticaly superior than those from other parts of the world" - you twist my words.

    I am going to check out SF this weekend. May I ask you, Joe, if you own SF, what model and how much did you pay for it?
  • joe97joe97 Posts: 2,248
    Sorry about the misunderstanding.

    I don't have a SF. I have a great job where I test all kinds of cars for a living!! :)

    Both models I tested was loaded - Santa Fe Limited / Outlander XLS.
  • defreitasmdefreitasm Posts: 152
    My experiance with two back to back Mitsubishis is that they offer a lot of bang for the buck and I was happy with the performance of both vehicles. That said, I was not happy with the fit and finish of their product and also had many warranty repair issues on both vehicles. I had a Montero and then an Eclipse both with enough problems to make me stay away from the brand for awhile. The only good thing is that everything was repaired under warranty, but not without some headaches.
  • xj220xj220 Posts: 78
    From someone who has owned cars from both brands (I've owned a '95 Eclipse GS-T and now own an '03 Elantra GT and an '07 Sonata Ltd), I have to say that both vehicles are quite nice and I don't think you can go wrong going either way. If I had to choose today, then I would pick the Santa Fe. Ask me the same question, and if I were 10 years younger, I'd probably pick the Outlander.

    Why the difference? Well, 10 years ago I was young and was really into how the car handled and performed. I also wanted a look that would catch people's attention. (I did, after all, buy an Eclipse.) And the cool features of the Outlander would certainly be geared toward me back then. But now, I'm a but more mature, more concerned with safety and ride. To be honest, I just don't care about driving like I have a sports car anymore. I'd take ride and peace and quiet over harshness and engine noise. Hence, the Santa Fe would be more suited towards me now. Also, I personally can account for Hyundai's remarkable reliability as of late and wouldn't think twice of buying another Hyundai today.

    I think both are two of the better SUV/CUVs out there for under $30k.
  • xj220xj220 Posts: 78
    Speaking of the factory at Normal, IL...

    I LOVED my Eclipse, but it was built in the POS factory in Normal, IL and literally gave me problems after problems from the start. It had to have been one of the most unreliable cars built in the 90s, if ever. Everything from the battery dying literally every 2 years to the driver's door panel caving in -- on 3 separate occasions! In total, I think I've sent my Eclipse to a mechanic for repairs no fewer than 20 times in the span of 10 years, and I am not exaggerating when I say that. So far, my Elantra of 4 years has had two problems -- 1st with a loose wire and 2nd with water in a headlight (although that may not be Hyundai's fault because that may have been an aftermarket headlight due to an accident...I didn't say anything and they covered it under warranty anyways, hehe). And the Sonata of 6+ months has had zero problems so far.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    LOVED my Eclipse, but it was built in the POS factory in Normal, IL and literally gave me problems after problems from the start. It had to have been one of the most unreliable cars built in the 90s

    Did you have an RS or GS? If so, you had a Chrysler in a Mitsubishi body. They both had the 420A engine built by Chrysler (Neon and Avenger as well). The only GS to get the Mitsubishi 2.4L was the Spyder and 10th Anniversary Edt(1999). The GS-T and GS-X were all Mitsubishi with the 4G63 motor, which is bullet proof (Still used in the current EVO). I had a 1998 GS-T, really great car.

    Most Mitsu's are good cars. I don't think any, besides the Raider, have any Chrysler engineering anymore.

    As for Toyota's built here, their engines and tranny's are still IMPORTED from Japan, that's why they run so long. Many other parts are sourced from here (U.S.). Honda does the same.

    Most of everything from Mazda comes from Japan, except the Mazda6 (still Mazda built), B-Series (rebadged Ranger), Tribute (rebadged Escape).
  • xj220xj220 Posts: 78
    (Sorry to be getting off the subject, but I just wanted to reply to this post.)

    I had a GS-T just like you. Although you must've have the new wheels and high spoiler (I know because my cousin had a '97 GS-T). Nothing wrong with the engine (until 10 years later I had a blown head gasket, which is why I scrapped it) and I never had a problem with the turbo. It's just everything else on it that fell apart. I don't think I've ever met another 2G Eclipse owner, who hasn't had consistent nagging or serious issues with their car. If you're the exception, then more power to you. I personally will never buy a vehicle coming from that plant again, even if Mitsubishi comes up with an AWD I-4 turbo +240hp car for under $25k.
  • d_hyperd_hyper Posts: 130
    Escape is a rebadged Tribute. I think this is a first time you have been corrected ;)
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    I never said I didn't have any issues! There were a few, wheel bearings, 3 or 4 CEL's, hot spots on the fly wheel, interior upholdstry was not the greatest. Overall, I was pleased with it.

    Most 2G Eclipse owners had the 420A, which was garbage.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    I don't know about that! :blush:

    The Tribute is a rebadged Escape, for sure. The platform was the old Mazda 626 platform, but, Ford made the Escape out of it. The Tribute has a Ford interior, Ford everything( buttons and switches), except the Mazda designed MZR 2.3 (4 cyl). Look at the new Tribute, and then the rest of the Mazda line up. It does not fit.

    But still, the Escape and Tribute have over all been decent vehicles.
  • d_hyperd_hyper Posts: 130
    Just fyi, Tribute beat Escape by 6 months to the market. Both teams started w/European 626 and designed it for their needs. For sure, there soon will be a CX-5 to replace Tribute and slot under CX-7 (just to stay relevant to the subject of the forum)
  • maximafanmaximafan Posts: 592
    Actually, "offense" and "offence" are both correct, as far as the spelling. Okay. I'm finished with the English lessons for now! :shades:
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    You are right about that.

    I do not expect the current Tribute to have a long run, however, Mazda needs an AWD SUV under $26,000.

    The current Tribute V6 Grand Touring 4X4 is around $25K, which is a great deal for what you get.
  • defreitasmdefreitasm Posts: 152
    Did you have an RS or GS? If so, you had a Chrysler in a Mitsubishi body. They both had the 420A engine built by Chrysler (Neon and Avenger as well). The only GS to get the Mitsubishi 2.4L was the Spyder and 10th Anniversary Edt(1999). The GS-T and GS-X were all Mitsubishi with the 4G63 motor, which is bullet proof (Still used in the current EVO). I had a 1998 GS-T, really great car.

    Actualy I had a GS and didn't have many problems with the engine except that they replaced the timing chain twice on me while it was in for something else because they heard a noise and this was from two differnt dealers. I had a problem twice with the manual transmission. The shifter would pop out of reverse on it's own. It was fixed once an the problem reoccurred. It was then fixed by another dealers and differnt parts were replaced. The dealer even told me up front that if it happened again, they would get me a new transmission. Manual transmissions are usually "bullet prooof". I had weird electrical problem with the engine idle fluctuating. The interior was put together like crap. The interior door panel warped while it was less than 3 months old. Just not a good product. Neither was my Montero. I had problems with door light switches on bothe cars. The Montero had a lousy cable system that never worked right for the heater controls. I could go on and on.
  • philmophilmo Posts: 77
    We finally got into a dealership yesterday -- and not because of the new David-Mamet-meets-Aaron-Sorkin-in-an-alley commercials. (Actually, it was the $50 Target rebate offer.) We'd been wanting to tool the thing around anyway.

    Observations, good: Very quiet, except when jumping on the throttle. Absorbs road chunk very well with none of the body roll typical of our 98 Grand Cherokee. Rearward visibility not as compromised as some competitors. Firm and comfortable front seats. Cargo room with usefully wide hatch opening. Sleep-able for two adults with rear seats folded. Rear seat folding electronic switch near the back hatch opening.

    Observations, not-so-good: Jumping on the throttle produces... not much but noise and awkward shifting. A slug, feels and steers heavy. Interior fit and finish -- weird juxtaposition in the SEL trim with leather seating against really cheesy door plastic. Color options. (Better for 2008?)

    With mileage numbers still suspect I'm worried that it will not get close to the 24 mpg listed on the sticker. I know, stickers are gross estimates -- but I've always managed to hit or slightly exceed them with my vehicles.

    As I've posted earlier, if I had to buy today I'd get the Santa Fe while not being wildly enthusiastic about the choices out there. Here's hoping the Jeep will last through the year and good things come in 2008 including the Highlander and Pilot redesigns.

    We still haven't taken a close look at the Veracrus or CX-9 except to note that the hatch on the Mazda appears to be way too narrow for my needs. I doubt I'd upsize the Hyundai as the Santa Fe is sleep-able and has a 48" plus hatch opening. And we don't need a third row seat.
  • audia8qaudia8q Posts: 3,138
    mazda is working on a Mazda3 based crossover...but I don't know anymore than that....perhaps that would be the replacement for the Tribute.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    I have heard that before. Do you know any details?

    Word is, it could be what the concept SUV "Hakaze" might evolve into by 2009
  • chuck68516chuck68516 Posts: 195
    This forum started as Santa Fe vs. Rav4 vs. CX7 vs. Edge. Of THOSE vehicles, the Ford Edge definitely has the er...edge. I test drove them all SEVERAL times in different model/packages. I liked certain aspects of all of them but ultimately decided that for the money the Ford was the way to go. I think they all have their drawbacks but the Ford Edge had fewer in my opinion. Most of the supposed downfalls, like it's weight, are rediculous. Why would you not buy it because it is 500lbs heavier than the Rav4? Drive them!!! If you do you will come to your own conclusion. Just don't go in thinking one is better because it is Japanese. Remember the old taste test commercials where they ask people to blindly pick which one they like better and people are surprised to find out they picked the one they didn't think they liked? Try going in giving them all an equal chance and see where you end up.
  • carlitos92carlitos92 Posts: 458
    Sounds like you definitely did your homework! Each of those vehicles probably has a well-matched owner who thinks their respective choice has the advantage over the others. For me, it was the CX-7, but to each his own, ja? ;)

    But to answer your question, a vehicle 500 pounds more than others of the same size, to me, points to inefficient and un-clever engineering. With all the demand for efficiency these days, one has to ask if and why Ford apparently took the low road with respect to the chassis design. And if they were lazy there, where else were they?

    By the same token, if Mazda couldn't do a gas cap right the first time, what else did they flub? :P
  • philmophilmo Posts: 77
    I don't care if it's 500 or 50 pounds heavier -- you can feel the porcine characteristics of the Edge when you test drive it. The Santa Fe, Rav-4 and especially the CX-7 are all much more nimble. As you suggest: test drive them all. I have.

    While out of scope of this forum, I'm keen on testing the CX-9 with the same engine as the Ford but getting much better reviews with regard to drivetrain performance by virtue of the Mazda 6-speed transmission. And on the Mazda one assumes they'll include an adult-mode manual selection. A non-trivial feature when driving mountain roads in snow and ice.

    At the end of the day, with last night's news reports of fuel hitting $4/gallon this summer, I'll wait to see what shows up in the showrooms for 2008. The use of our old Grand Cherokee will be greatly curtailed this summer. At least we have options with other vehicles and can leave the SUV when we truly need the U, as in Utility.
  • vbbuiltvbbuilt Posts: 498
    I'm guessing you have the wherewithal to purchase and own more than one vehicle, one a utility and another that gets great gas milage. Yes? That gives you best of both worlds.

    My question: what if you can only afford ONE vehicle? Criteria? It has to be new, it has to have cargo capacity, be able to tow 3,000 lbs, have nimble handling, carry more than 5 adults, achieve decent gas milage, has an luxury interior (leather, NAV, power everything).

    What would you purchase?

    :shades:

    Vince.
  • hardhawkhardhawk Posts: 702
    GMC Acadia or Buick Enclave fit the bill for what you are looking for.
  • philmophilmo Posts: 77
    "...what if you can only afford ONE vehicle? Criteria? It has to be new, it has to have cargo capacity, be able to tow 3,000 lbs, have nimble handling, carry more than 5 adults, achieve decent gas milage, has an luxury interior (leather, NAV, power everything).

    "What would you purchase?"


    I'd add ground clearance to the criteria checklist.

    It would have to be the Santa Fe though I'd rather have it without the third row seat. There's some nifty hidden storage in the compartment where the seat folds when configured without that option.

    It has the highest cargo capacity in this group. Ties the CX-7 for clearance. Tows 3500lbs. Has a 45"+ wide liftgate (not barn door). Arguabley the best interior -- especially with night driving. Uses regular gas.

    As I've said in past postings, if I had to buy today I'd get the Santa Fe. But there are too many interesting things in the pipeline for 2008-9. As long as I can wait I will.
  • piastpiast Posts: 269
    1. Mitsubishi Outlander
    2. Hyundai Santa Fe
    3. Volvo XC90
  • chuck68516chuck68516 Posts: 195
    None of these vehicles (SMALL SUV's) seat MORE THAN 5! Maybe you could get 6 toddlers jammed in there. I am 6'4" tall and weigh 210lbs and that definitely played a factor in my vehicle purchase as it has my whole life. The smaller foreign suv's just don't seem to agree with my stature. The numbers may lie but I didn't feel nearly as comfortable in the Santa Fe, Rav4 or the CX-7 as I did in the Edge. But my overall point is GOOD LUCK GETTING IN THE 3rd ROW OF ANY VEHICLE IN THIS CLASS! My gym bag won't fit back there! I also got the Edge because it doesn't have a 3rd row cargo bin (notice I didn't say seat).
    You have to go up to the CX-9 sized vehicle to get a 3rd row seat someone could actually sit in.
  • joe97joe97 Posts: 2,248
    I was very comfortable in the Santa Fe and its 3rd row, slightly less in the RAV4.

    By the way, the Santa Fe is no small SUV.
  • vbbuiltvbbuilt Posts: 498
    Oh, one more thing to add to criteria...

    Tops in reliability statistics. Generally, American car manufacturers are at the bottom of the barrel. I don't want to have to be in the shop more than on the road. :shades:

    Vince.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 8,062
    Tops in reliability statistics. Generally, American car manufacturers are at the bottom of the barrel.

    Bulletin - it's not 1985 anymore. The Fusion is more reliable than both the Accord and Camry. No reason to think the Edge will be any worse.
This discussion has been closed.