This is all over the net. I bought one for my wife and she loves it. It surely is fun to drive it, very car-like. When i'm not driving my H3 Alpha, i am usually in this vehicle especially on trips from here San Diego to Las Vegas.
It's been an interesting Fall since I started researching SUV/CUVs and yesterday spent 8 hours doing extensive test drives of four: Outlook, VC, JGC and Liberty. I had previously done "non controlled" 2nd drives with my wife and college age son of Tribecas(too small for us, my son & I are over 6' tall), Highlander & Pilot (wife says too plain and "everybody's got them") so they were out. I know we are not apples to apples here with SUVs and CUVs but those on this forum might be interested in the two CUVs at least. My history is I own and have been happy with an 01 Jeep Gr Cherokee that my son will be taking to college this winter. I need a min 5 passenger 2500lb boat puller that gets relatively good mpg. So that eliminates the small Ford/Lincoln due to 2000 lb towing and our only Mazda dealer w/i 100 miles went bellyup so no CX9s either. While most on this forum only care about 2 of these here is how I ended up. Test drive conditions: 54 deg F, 35mph NW wind, light rain, dependent on trip computers for short range MPG work but drove them exactly the same on first MPG tests, no lead footing. Excuse formatting, posting won't let me do a list. =====
4th worst place - 08 Jeep Liberty Ltd. Loaded. I had high hopes since my wife still wants leather & this was pretty affordable w/5000lb tow rating, but the small backseat & generally hard plastic interior plus rough ride (into wind made me think hood was loose, it was lifting the hood visibly) was a bummer despite its good old style Jeep looks. MPG: 18.1 & 18.4 highway/city 10 miles each (first course mostly 65-40mph, no stop lights). I realized later I did not have the selectrac full time 4WD drive engaged so these MPGs would have been lower in true comparisons to other vehicles, however I did not redo it since it was not gonna make it for us. - - -
3rd place husband (2nd place wife) - 07 Jeep Gr Cherokee Laredo 4.7L semi-loaded 4WD. After driving the Liberty this seemed like a limo especially handling & road ride/noise. Features a little dated compared to 2&1. Best small boat puller. MPG: 16.5 & 16.4 H/C. Note this was an 07; 08 engines are being upgraded for more hp/torque but none are out yet. Both Jeeps w/lifetime powertrain warranty and best bet for a drive-it-into the ground value. - - - -
2nd place (3rd wife) - 08 Hyundai Veracruz GLS AWD. Not the best for towing as need to add hitch & even then only 3500 lb rated but it just was so quiet and smooth (& after driving a JGC for 7 years I like something different, wife likes to keep it the same). Does have <25mph locked AWD option. Good reviews, best TCO, and friend recommendations of Hyundai (but Santa Fe's) swayed rating too. MPG: 19.5, 23 H/C. Best overall warranty. - - - - - - - - - - -
1st place - 08 Saturn Outlook XR AWD. Quiet roomy road warrior. Wife says like our old ext Caravan but I pointed out the swing doors and Fortera 18s that seemed to get her outa that mindset. MPG: 20.5, 16 H/C. This last number dropped since we were on a stoplight course late in the day during rush hour. Note we wanted an XE due to budget reasons but all they had were XRs, we are still debating the value of leather which the wife likes & will see if we can swing it depending on when our son's current car sells. Oh yes - did an erroneous first test drive on a FWD version and MPG was 23.5, 24 ... incredible, but unfortunately not the drive train we wanted. - - - - - - - - -
Other items tested: time for heater to warm up - all were in the minute range (in MN we need a good heater despite our warm Fall). I still need to look into recommended maintenance that will factor into the Total Cost of Ownership which for me is mostly that and fuel since I don't need financing and plan to drive it into the ground.
A surprising test-drive with a Toyota Sienna showed a ground clearance equal or better than a Mazda CX-9 (our former top choice after a driveway scraping experience with a Honda Odyssey.)
Amazing drivetrain, it will go 0-60 in 7+ second. IP outdone by current CUVs and the Odyssey. Room, lots of it.
ateixeira, we'll be riding the same rig pretty soon :-)
I was reading your post and knowing exactly which choice you would pick.
The Outlook does seem to fit your needs-it tows, can actually accomadate adults, and handles decently, while getting good gas mileage. I'd say it's your best compromise.
It's Tuesday, so that means it's time for our weekly chat session. Meet and greet with some of your CarSpace forums friends and chat about your favorite cars!
I speak up when I feel I can contribute something.
Unlike you, who just likes to dish out insults. You could at least learn to spell my handle if you would like to address me. I guess I'm expecting too much from you.
I'm rather amused when you talk about vehicles being overweight when your family of 3 (occasionally 5) rides around in a two-ton plus Freestyle. Why not a Focus wagon? A Honda Fit? A Prius?
It is funny that you are so judgemental about people buying heavy vehicles, that's all. Do as I say, not as I do?
Dodge Caravan is quicker 0-60. Edmunds says it's the quickest minivan they've tested
It is, however Edmudns has not tested the new 3.5l Sienna (the last one they drove was a 2006).
Car & Driver did, and it was quickest in every single acceleration test. Paradoxically, it was also the most fuel efficient. 3mpg better than the Ody. :shades:
The Dodge held its own, beating the Honda in accleration and fuel efficiency.
C&D tested an Enclave as well, but it was no match for the Sienna in acceleration or fuel efficiency. Check out the last couple of issues if you want to compare the results.
nastacio: FWIW, autos.com did manage 6.7s to 60mph in their Sienna. Just make sure your kids are well buckled and think twice about using full throttle.
I *loved* the Forester, but we travel in large groups and just needed a lot more space. We've taken road trips with 6, 7, even 8 people to the beach, theme parks in PA, and even all the way up to CT with 6 plus luggage.
At least we're using the extra space as intended. The van is a lot more efficient vs. taking 2 cars, no doubt. Highway mileage is anywhere from 26-31 mpg.
Crossovers seem to do well at carrying people OR cargo, but not both. Two families need more luggage space for a week's vacation.
For the wife, our space requirements won't be nearly as great. I do want AWD, because it'll be the only snow vehicle in our fleet. So AWD, decent clearance, room for 5, reasonable cargo space, and decent efficiency. A little fun wouldn't hurt.
CX7 needs premium fuel and didn't impress me as much as I'd hoped. I love the styling. CR says it's not reliable?
We will check out the 2009 Foresters when they arrive, maybe the Rogue as well. Saturn sent us a Test Drive Certificate so we'll probably go an try out a Vue Redline.
I like the RD-X in principal but it's pricey and a bit small. Same for the X3.
Pretty wide open choices, basically.
I still have the Miata for my commute. This way my fleet is used very efficiently. I don't have to drive the bulky van in the city at all, and the Miata sips fuel.
Probably didn't include the TX since it's mainly just a new grill, engine, tranny and name. Why would they include a vehicle that has been on the market for several years?
I *loved* the Forester, but we travel in large groups and just needed a lot more space
My father-in-law traded his 2004 Forester X in Sept. 2006 for a 2007 CX-7 GT AWD w/tech. He was a long time Subi owner. He loves the CX for it's driving dynamics, looks, and gadgetry.
CX7 needs premium fuel and didn't impress me as much as I'd hoped. I love the styling. CR says it's not reliable?
The 2008 CX-7 can run on regular, however, premium is recommended. The CX-7 got a bum write up from CR because Mazda let the CEL issue linger too long. There was the early gas cap issue, followed by the some intake manifold valve issue that also threw a CEL. Apparently, there are still a few owners with recurring CEL's. There is nothing mechanically wrong with the car. The actual engine/tranny AWD system have been fine. My father in laws' has around 30K on it, and he was an early CEL victim, since then, everything has been fine. I check up with him regularly to insure his satisfaction.
My wife is now looking to possibly replace her 2002 Impreza 2.5RS. We have had a bit of issues with it, but, it seems to be fine now. I would really like her to get a more fuel efficient vehicle. The Impreza is returning on average of 22 mpg's. She is a teacher, and never has to work when it snows, however, all she has ever driven is AWD, and feels safer. So, she is looking at the CX-7, new Impreza and possibly an Outback. She has been bugging me about the new Mazda6, because she loves driving mine when I let her, and the rumor of AWD, but, I cannot get anyone in Mazda's hierarchy to spill the beans on whether is will have AWD as an option. So, it looks as if we will be having the Impreza for a bit longer.
What part of CT do you go to? I live in CT, on the NY border.
I agree. This is getting tiresome and boring. I also fail to see why somebody constantly brings up a minivan in this forum. We know you got a minivan. We know you are overjoyed about it. EVERYONE KNOWS. Enough already.
I think it occurs because for so many people, a minivan would be a more practical car. If people could get past the stigma of owning one (something I don't understand actually) I think they would find them to be more useful than their crossover competitors. I shopped Pilots and Odysseys and the Ody made more sense.
I also fail to see why somebody constantly brings up a minivan in this forum.
Originally, this was a CX-9/Lambdas/minivan comparison thread, but then [the one no one speaks of] :-) interjected the FS and the moderators knew better than argue him to death, hence changing the thread to "Crossover SUV Comparison".
I think minivans are an appropriate comparison, though. I am not much for controversy, but make those two lambda rear doors slide and you have a slower minivan with half the space behind 3rd row. :-)
I had forgotten that I had started this discussion. That'll teach me to listen to suggestions. :shades:
I'm biased too since I have an Outback and a minivan, and would take the minivan in a NY second if I had to choose. I just got back from an ~800 mile road trip in a 2005 Forester and it was plenty comfy for 2 people, but it's still no minivan.
As far as aisle cleanup, please stick to cars and ignore those posts that make your carburetor choke.
Originally, this was a CX-9/Lambdas/minivan comparison thread, but then [the one no one speaks of] interjected the FS and the moderators knew better than argue him to death, hence changing the thread to "Crossover SUV Comparison".
When did this happen? like 9 posts into the forum? When I got here it was a big list of 3 row crossovers.
I will agree that minivans are okay to compare, because there is such a fine line to the CUV thing. And if given the choice of an Odessey or Pilot, I'd take the Ody in a second. THe Pilot is OUTDATED.
Probably didn't include the TX since it's mainly just a new grill, engine, tranny and name. Why would they include a vehicle that has been on the market for several years?
Ford did as much as they did when they facelifted the Expy for '07, which was retested last year in the SUOTY. So the TX is fair game.
"The hits just keep coming for Toyota Motor Co. After a pair of new problems with its all-important Tundra pickup were brought to light this week, a reader sent us a link to this article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that reveals the automaker will voluntarily fix the front doors on 600,000 units of its Sienna minivan (current model shown above) built between 2004 and 2006. Apparently there may be an issue with the door check mounting panel on both of the minivan's front doors. The door check mounting panel is the piece that keeps the door open, and if the part fails the door can swing freely and unexpectedly shut – obviously a concern for parents with kids. Toyota has traced the problem back to bad spot welds performed at the automaker's Princeton, Indiana factory.
Toyota will be sending out letters on Nov. 2nd to owners of said Siennas explaining the problem and offering to fix it. To do so, Toyota will offer what it calls a "warranty enhancement" to these vehicles, covering the cost of these door repairs on Siennas up to five years old with 100,000 miles or less. Though a bad spot weld on the door check mounting panel would normally be covered by the Sienna's standard warranty, that only lasts 3 years or 36,000 miles. Toyota has also said that it will reimburse owners who have already had the doors repaired on their own, in some cases at the cost of thousands of dollars.
Curiously, Toyota is not calling this a recall. Of course, what automaker wants to refer to a problem with one of its vehicles as a recall if it doesn't have to? As long as Toyota takes care of the Sienna door problem to the satisfaction of its customers, they can call it a Happy Happy, Joy Joy Service Encouragement Bulletin."
SUVOTY, I would like to know where you heard that red lights are better for your eyes than blue. Blue lights are showing up more often now and I find that the blue is much more relaxing to the eyes than the red. The red can become too harsh for long time driving at night. I guess that maybe it is a matter of taste, but those red instrument panel lights are too distracting.
Recalling something I read, if you have to see fine details, then red is easier to see (something about red cones being dense in front of the retina). However to your point, this means that red can be fatiguing to the eye after a while. So blue-green can be used for less fatigue, however you will lose ability to see fine detail.
I wonder if color-blind people would be screwed if all the instrument panel was in red during night-time?
Norwalk and Milford to visit the in-laws. The trip takes 5-7 hours so comfort and range are paramount.
I didn't bring up the vans, I just responded when someone said the Dodge was the quickest. We have new data now that C&D compared them head to head.
freealfas: sorry to disappoint you, but my van is not affected.
You say you loved the peace and quiet, then why'd you provoke me while I was away, behind my back? And now once again you bring up vans, and from several model years back. Who is off topic now?
I'll drop the subject (again) until someone else brings it up.
Ford did as much as they did when they facelifted the Expy for '07, which was retested last year in the SUOTY. So the TX is fair game.
I know this doesn't relate entirely to this thread but that's not all true. The Expy, and the 2006 Explorer before it, look to only have been facelifts when in fact a lot of chassis/frame changes were made. The Expy was upgraded to the current F-150 frame with enhancements which will make it compatible with the future F-150. It also received a second gen IRS along with an upgraded body which accomodates the new EL version. There were numerous other changes but those seem to go unnoticed all the time but shouldn't because they do make a big difference.
I would add that the TX probably has the same changes applied to the Taurus, which includes the way the engine is mounted to the chassis as well. C&D explains the surgery and benefits in more detail.
A few more posts that concerned members instead of crossovers have been removed. If y'all don't want to talk SUVs, we can put this one in mothballs for a while.
I'm not sure if I was a part of the problem (I mentioned minivans being more practical versions of these crossovers in most cases [Pilot v. Ody, Sienna v. Highlander]). Sorry!
The current wheelbase is very short for its class, still under 100".
The new one will get a wheelbase at least as long as the Impreza, so that should resolve the rear leg room issue.
There are two theories about the upcoming Forester - some say it'll continue as is, basically a taller, boxier Impreza. Others say we'll get a baby Tribeca.
We'll have to wait and see. The Tribeca is already only a 5+2 so I can't imagine something even smaller offering a 3rd row.
Blue lights are showing up more often now and I find that the blue is much more relaxing to the eyes than the red. The red can become too harsh for long time driving at night.
Uh-uh. Blue lights contrast too much with darkness, which can hurt the eyes. It can also be too bright. Red is a little more nuetral, and the intensity on the eyes is less, so they strain less. So blue lighting is more harsh and distracting.
And the name's not SUVOTY (guess you weren't here for the motortrend suv of the year discussion) it's Albook.
What's a little chassis work? Happens all the time. The Expy didn't even get a new engine- while the TX did. And the Explorer was definitely a facelift, with a bigger engine. I'm even more shocked MT didn't test it because Ford changed the name (idiots).
I heard Edmunds has seen the new Murano. Can't wait to see it.
Because of red's location on the spectrum, it requires the least adjustment by the eyes from darkness (which is why most military aircraft now use red dials). Blue/Purples are on the opposite end of the spectrum. Remember ROY G. BIV (that's how we learned it in school). In order Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Indigo, and Violet. Violet is the hardest to change your eyes to because of wavelength (closer to ultraviolet). Red is the easiest (closest to infrared).
I'd have to pull out my old astronomy book to give you exact measurements for these colors, but this is how it was explained to me. Hope this helps!
You can find more info on the changes to both if you do a simple search. If you don't think these changes are significant enough then I don't know what to tell you. New frames, bodies, drivetrains, interiors and exteriors say to me the changes were significant.
The reason you and most of the public don't know about all the changes is because Ford's marketing department dropped the ball from a very high place by never telling anyone. All they did was print some pictures of the minor sheetmetal changes in magazines and called it a day.
Still sucks down the dino juice though, relative to the power it makes...
I won't argue much with you there. We have the V6 and get 14 mpg in the city and just over 22 on the highway. However, the torque it produces allows its performance to be competitive and, being that you can get an Explorer for thousands off of sticker, it's still worthy of consideration IMO.
However, I'm not seeing where these new CUVs are much better at conserving dino juice either. Do I think they are what most Americans need? Sure. But they cost more than something like the Explorer now and I fail to see why. I've sat in several of them, never drove one yet though, and the current Explorer is every bit as nice inside as most of them.
Trucks are great for what they're intended to do - haul and tow. If you have a boat, an Explorer is probably better for towing than an Edge.
Thing is, few SUV owners actually used those abilities. When they were selling in record numbers, it was mostly soccer moms buying them up. Go to soccer practice and I bet it wouldn't be hard to find a dozen SUVs parked next to each other, and maybe one or two of them had a tow hitch.
Crossovers are more car-like and pamper those soccer moms a little better. $90 per barrel gas sent them looking for more fuel efficiency. Even though they're still not efficient, it's still some improvement.
Comments
4th worst place - 08 Jeep Liberty Ltd. Loaded. I had high hopes since my wife still wants leather & this was pretty affordable w/5000lb tow rating, but the small backseat & generally hard plastic interior plus rough ride (into wind made me think hood was loose, it was lifting the hood visibly) was a bummer despite its good old style Jeep looks. MPG: 18.1 & 18.4 highway/city 10 miles each (first course mostly 65-40mph, no stop lights). I realized later I did not have the selectrac full time 4WD drive engaged so these MPGs would have been lower in true comparisons to other vehicles, however I did not redo it since it was not gonna make it for us. - - -
3rd place husband (2nd place wife) - 07 Jeep Gr Cherokee Laredo 4.7L semi-loaded 4WD. After driving the Liberty this seemed like a limo especially handling & road ride/noise. Features a little dated compared to 2&1. Best small boat puller. MPG: 16.5 & 16.4 H/C. Note this was an 07; 08 engines are being upgraded for more hp/torque but none are out yet. Both Jeeps w/lifetime powertrain warranty and best bet for a drive-it-into the ground value. - - - -
2nd place (3rd wife) - 08 Hyundai Veracruz GLS AWD. Not the best for towing as need to add hitch & even then only 3500 lb rated but it just was so quiet and smooth (& after driving a JGC for 7 years I like something different, wife likes to keep it the same). Does have <25mph locked AWD option. Good reviews, best TCO, and friend recommendations of Hyundai (but Santa Fe's) swayed rating too.
MPG: 19.5, 23 H/C. Best overall warranty. - - - - - - - - - - -
1st place - 08 Saturn Outlook XR AWD. Quiet roomy road warrior. Wife says like our old ext Caravan but I pointed out the swing doors and Fortera 18s that seemed to get her outa that mindset. MPG: 20.5, 16 H/C. This last number dropped since we were on a stoplight course late in the day during rush hour. Note we wanted an XE due to budget reasons but all they had were XRs, we are still debating the value of leather which the wife likes & will see if we can swing it depending on when our son's current car sells. Oh yes - did an erroneous first test drive on a FWD version and MPG was 23.5, 24 ... incredible, but unfortunately not the drive train we wanted. - - - - - - - - -
Other items tested: time for heater to warm up - all were in the
Amazing drivetrain, it will go 0-60 in 7+ second. IP outdone by current CUVs and the Odyssey. Room, lots of it.
ateixeira, we'll be riding the same rig pretty soon :-)
Shoot, almost any car these days will do 60 in 7+ seconds. It's finding one that'll do it in 7 or less that's the hard part.
I knew what you were saying, just playing with ya!
The Outlook does seem to fit your needs-it tows, can actually accomadate adults, and handles decently, while getting good gas mileage. I'd say it's your best compromise.
The Mazda Club Chat is on tonight. The chat room opens at 8:45PM ET Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule
Unlike you, who just likes to dish out insults. You could at least learn to spell my handle if you would like to address me. I guess I'm expecting too much from you.
I'm rather amused when you talk about vehicles being overweight when your family of 3 (occasionally 5) rides around in a two-ton plus Freestyle. Why not a Focus wagon? A Honda Fit? A Prius?
It is funny that you are so judgemental about people buying heavy vehicles, that's all. Do as I say, not as I do?
It is, however Edmudns has not tested the new 3.5l Sienna (the last one they drove was a 2006).
Car & Driver did, and it was quickest in every single acceleration test. Paradoxically, it was also the most fuel efficient. 3mpg better than the Ody. :shades:
The Dodge held its own, beating the Honda in accleration and fuel efficiency.
C&D tested an Enclave as well, but it was no match for the Sienna in acceleration or fuel efficiency. Check out the last couple of issues if you want to compare the results.
nastacio: FWIW, autos.com did manage 6.7s to 60mph in their Sienna. Just make sure your kids are well buckled and think twice about using full throttle.
http://www.autos.com/autos/vans/minivans/acceleration
We're back in the market, this time for my wife, though we'll probably get a smaller one since I'll still have the van.
I *loved* the Forester, but we travel in large groups and just needed a lot more space. We've taken road trips with 6, 7, even 8 people to the beach, theme parks in PA, and even all the way up to CT with 6 plus luggage.
At least we're using the extra space as intended. The van is a lot more efficient vs. taking 2 cars, no doubt. Highway mileage is anywhere from 26-31 mpg.
Crossovers seem to do well at carrying people OR cargo, but not both. Two families need more luggage space for a week's vacation.
For the wife, our space requirements won't be nearly as great. I do want AWD, because it'll be the only snow vehicle in our fleet. So AWD, decent clearance, room for 5, reasonable cargo space, and decent efficiency. A little fun wouldn't hurt.
CX7 needs premium fuel and didn't impress me as much as I'd hoped. I love the styling. CR says it's not reliable?
We will check out the 2009 Foresters when they arrive, maybe the Rogue as well. Saturn sent us a Test Drive Certificate so we'll probably go an try out a Vue Redline.
I like the RD-X in principal but it's pricey and a bit small. Same for the X3.
Pretty wide open choices, basically.
I still have the Miata for my commute. This way my fleet is used very efficiently. I don't have to drive the bulky van in the city at all, and the Miata sips fuel.
My father-in-law traded his 2004 Forester X in Sept. 2006 for a 2007 CX-7 GT AWD w/tech. He was a long time Subi owner. He loves the CX for it's driving dynamics, looks, and gadgetry.
CX7 needs premium fuel and didn't impress me as much as I'd hoped. I love the styling. CR says it's not reliable?
The 2008 CX-7 can run on regular, however, premium is recommended. The CX-7 got a bum write up from CR because Mazda let the CEL issue linger too long. There was the early gas cap issue, followed by the some intake manifold valve issue that also threw a CEL. Apparently, there are still a few owners with recurring CEL's. There is nothing mechanically wrong with the car. The actual engine/tranny AWD system have been fine. My father in laws' has around 30K on it, and he was an early CEL victim, since then, everything has been fine. I check up with him regularly to insure his satisfaction.
My wife is now looking to possibly replace her 2002 Impreza 2.5RS. We have had a bit of issues with it, but, it seems to be fine now. I would really like her to get a more fuel efficient vehicle. The Impreza is returning on average of 22 mpg's. She is a teacher, and never has to work when it snows, however, all she has ever driven is AWD, and feels safer. So, she is looking at the CX-7, new Impreza and possibly an Outback. She has been bugging me about the new Mazda6, because she loves driving mine when I let her, and the rumor of AWD, but, I cannot get anyone in Mazda's hierarchy to spill the beans on whether is will have AWD as an option. So, it looks as if we will be having the Impreza for a bit longer.
What part of CT do you go to? I live in CT, on the NY border.
Geesh.
Originally, this was a CX-9/Lambdas/minivan comparison thread, but then [the one no one speaks of] :-) interjected the FS and the moderators knew better than argue him to death, hence changing the thread to "Crossover SUV Comparison".
I think minivans are an appropriate comparison, though. I am not much for controversy, but make those two lambda rear doors slide and you have a slower minivan with half the space behind 3rd row. :-)
I'm biased too since I have an Outback and a minivan, and would take the minivan in a NY second if I had to choose. I just got back from an ~800 mile road trip in a 2005 Forester and it was plenty comfy for 2 people, but it's still no minivan.
As far as aisle cleanup, please stick to cars and ignore those posts that make your carburetor choke.
LOL... nastaco, I didn't want ateixeira to think his was the only name I could have a typo on...
I hear there's going to be a made over EDGE at SEMA, any pics, wonder what they did to it... trying to keep on-topic...
you post to hear yourself and see your name on the screen hence 48K+ and growing posts
Free- that was funny, but harsh. Let's try to get back the the CROSSOVERS.
Ateixeira most of the beef has been cleared up now, but good to have you back.
When did this happen? like 9 posts into the forum? When I got here it was a big list of 3 row crossovers.
I will agree that minivans are okay to compare, because there is such a fine line to the CUV thing. And if given the choice of an Odessey or Pilot, I'd take the Ody in a second. THe Pilot is OUTDATED.
Ford did as much as they did when they facelifted the Expy for '07, which was retested last year in the SUOTY. So the TX is fair game.
"The hits just keep coming for Toyota Motor Co. After a pair of new problems with its all-important Tundra pickup were brought to light this week, a reader sent us a link to this article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that reveals the automaker will voluntarily fix the front doors on 600,000 units of its Sienna minivan (current model shown above) built between 2004 and 2006. Apparently there may be an issue with the door check mounting panel on both of the minivan's front doors. The door check mounting panel is the piece that keeps the door open, and if the part fails the door can swing freely and unexpectedly shut – obviously a concern for parents with kids. Toyota has traced the problem back to bad spot welds performed at the automaker's Princeton, Indiana factory.
Toyota will be sending out letters on Nov. 2nd to owners of said Siennas explaining the problem and offering to fix it. To do so, Toyota will offer what it calls a "warranty enhancement" to these vehicles, covering the cost of these door repairs on Siennas up to five years old with 100,000 miles or less. Though a bad spot weld on the door check mounting panel would normally be covered by the Sienna's standard warranty, that only lasts 3 years or 36,000 miles. Toyota has also said that it will reimburse owners who have already had the doors repaired on their own, in some cases at the cost of thousands of dollars.
Curiously, Toyota is not calling this a recall. Of course, what automaker wants to refer to a problem with one of its vehicles as a recall if it doesn't have to? As long as Toyota takes care of the Sienna door problem to the satisfaction of its customers, they can call it a Happy Happy, Joy Joy Service Encouragement Bulletin."
Shoot, that is some questionable quality right there. Apparently passing GM in number of vehicles was not enough for Toyota.
PS: Completely frustrated with quality on our Honda Accord. Last week one of the internal lights stopped working.
I wonder if color-blind people would be screwed if all the instrument panel was in red during night-time?
Drivers of BMWs and 90s Pontiacs are able to read the gauges!
Honestly, a colorblind friend of mine drove his '91 BMW 3-series until the day it died!
I didn't bring up the vans, I just responded when someone said the Dodge was the quickest. We have new data now that C&D compared them head to head.
freealfas: sorry to disappoint you, but my van is not affected.
You say you loved the peace and quiet, then why'd you provoke me while I was away, behind my back? And now once again you bring up vans, and from several model years back. Who is off topic now?
I'll drop the subject (again) until someone else brings it up.
I know this doesn't relate entirely to this thread but that's not all true. The Expy, and the 2006 Explorer before it, look to only have been facelifts when in fact a lot of chassis/frame changes were made. The Expy was upgraded to the current F-150 frame with enhancements which will make it compatible with the future F-150. It also received a second gen IRS along with an upgraded body which accomodates the new EL version. There were numerous other changes but those seem to go unnoticed all the time but shouldn't because they do make a big difference.
Just wondering how people were supposed to know you were away? :confuse:
By noticing he didn't reply to any posting within the past 30 minutes :- D Sorry [ateixeira], couldn't let that one pass.
Are we going to have a big 50K party soon?
The current wheelbase is very short for its class, still under 100".
The new one will get a wheelbase at least as long as the Impreza, so that should resolve the rear leg room issue.
There are two theories about the upcoming Forester - some say it'll continue as is, basically a taller, boxier Impreza. Others say we'll get a baby Tribeca.
We'll have to wait and see. The Tribeca is already only a 5+2 so I can't imagine something even smaller offering a 3rd row.
Uh-uh. Blue lights contrast too much with darkness, which can hurt the eyes. It can also be too bright. Red is a little more nuetral, and the intensity on the eyes is less, so they strain less. So blue lighting is more harsh and distracting.
And the name's not SUVOTY (guess you weren't here for the motortrend suv of the year discussion) it's Albook.
I heard Edmunds has seen the new Murano. Can't wait to see it.
I'd have to pull out my old astronomy book to give you exact measurements for these colors, but this is how it was explained to me. Hope this helps!
Not any larger, just more powerful (and only the V8). They still use a 4.0L 210hp V6 (unchanged), and a 4.6L 292hp V8 (up from 239 hp).
Totally false. I know because I own one.
2007 Expedition
2006 Explorer
You can find more info on the changes to both if you do a simple search. If you don't think these changes are significant enough then I don't know what to tell you. New frames, bodies, drivetrains, interiors and exteriors say to me the changes were significant.
The reason you and most of the public don't know about all the changes is because Ford's marketing department dropped the ball from a very high place by never telling anyone. All they did was print some pictures of the minor sheetmetal changes in magazines and called it a day.
I won't argue much with you there. We have the V6 and get 14 mpg in the city and just over 22 on the highway. However, the torque it produces allows its performance to be competitive and, being that you can get an Explorer for thousands off of sticker, it's still worthy of consideration IMO.
However, I'm not seeing where these new CUVs are much better at conserving dino juice either. Do I think they are what most Americans need? Sure. But they cost more than something like the Explorer now and I fail to see why. I've sat in several of them, never drove one yet though, and the current Explorer is every bit as nice inside as most of them.
Trucks are great for what they're intended to do - haul and tow. If you have a boat, an Explorer is probably better for towing than an Edge.
Thing is, few SUV owners actually used those abilities. When they were selling in record numbers, it was mostly soccer moms buying them up. Go to soccer practice and I bet it wouldn't be hard to find a dozen SUVs parked next to each other, and maybe one or two of them had a tow hitch.
Crossovers are more car-like and pamper those soccer moms a little better. $90 per barrel gas sent them looking for more fuel efficiency. Even though they're still not efficient, it's still some improvement.
Surprisingly, the CR-V now outsells the Explorer.
This Crossover Thinks It's a Sport Coupe
Check out the Infiniti EX35 group too.