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

1…4344464849…96

Comments

  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    Think of the money they could make removing it and selling that as an option!

    ;-)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Jason: the problem was replacing those air bladders once the rubber wore out. You're talking $500 per corner. Most people don't bother and actually convert the air suspensions to springs.

    They're still used on high-end cars like the Audi allroad quattro, but those owners can afford the $2 grand re-do.

    LOL about the extra-cost cladding removal.

    -juice
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    $500/corner + $300 for the Pump + $300 for the Control Unit.

    I spoke with an Audi rep @ the carshow about the All-road and they said basically that the Audi clients won't mind paying the repairs, and that most of them were leased and would be under warranty, and then resold as "certified used" which would also carry a warranty.

    -mike
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Ouch. Can't blame you for swapping to RS springs. What did that conversion cost? I'm sure only a fraction of the air suspension replacement.

    -juice
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Bought the RS struts and springs for $125 + $50 to have the lower mounts re-welded and widened for the lower mounts on the XT6, the rears were new parts from subaru and cost $150 for the springs and $200 for the other parts (bump stops, mounting brackets etc) and $80 for the shocks from monroe.

    -mike
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    That's not bad, then. You'd pay a couple hundred for new shocks/struts on a traditional suspension anyway.

    -juice
  • jaserbjaserb Member Posts: 820
    Never mind... maybe just add an "off-road" option kinda like the Detroit guys do. "The Subaru Forester (Baja) FX4 ZR2 Z71 TRD Off-road edition" or something like that. Forester actually looks OK, height wise, but I know a lot of people who actually off-road in them swap out the springs, etc. anyway. I expect the same to happen for the Baja, but it would be nice to have it as a factory option.
    -Jason
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    They have nudge bars for the Baja already.

    -mike
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    You can get 2" taller springs all around for $360, they fit the Outback so I'm sure they'll fit the Baja.

    You can buy 2" lift kits as well, throw bigger tires on a Forester and you can get ground clearance well above 10".

    Just don't expect it to handle as stock.

    -juice
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    By the way, Subaru just announced Baja pricing. A lot of us expected it to have pricing in line with the Outback Limited, since it has similar equipment, but Subaru surprised us all and prices are actually about $2 grand less than an equivalent Outback.

    $23,995 at MSRP. That'll put street prices at about $22k, even lower eventually.

    -juice
  • ozone1ozone1 Member Posts: 87
    Short article which appeared today on CNN's web site. Check it out.


    http://money.cnn.com/2002/08/07/pf/autos/suv_types.krt/index.htm

  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Because the author is obviously ill informed. The Liberty is NOT Truck based at all!

    -mike
  • vuefor2vuefor2 Member Posts: 490
    Liberty gas mileage is horrible. One of the reasons we ditched the idea of it. The point of a small utility is to get some sort of economy out of it. If I wanted that kind of mileage we would have got a used Pathfinder.

    As for whether Liberty is "truck based" or not, who cares as long as it works.

    The guy seemed to like the Vue for the same reasons we like out Vue, the smooth ride.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    My point is that the guy doesn't know that the Liberty is not truck based, how could you put any faith in anything else he writes? Seems odd how people could get to such high positions on such little knowledge.

    -mike
  • ozone1ozone1 Member Posts: 87
    I agree, I could really care less what you want to clasify the Liberty's base on. It is Jeep based, that's all that mattered to me. We bought a Liberty because we actually need the off-road capability for our backpacking, mountain biking and Cross-country ski trips. Gas mileage does suck, but, for the record, we have yet to run out between gas stations
  • tincup47tincup47 Member Posts: 1,508
    Personally, I find this definition laughable in most cases as it is too simplistic. If the Liberty is car based, what car is it based on? Is a 95-02 Range Rover truck based because it is body on frame, even though Land Rover bases no actual truck on this chassis? I guess the Crown Victoria is also since it's body on frame with live rear axles like a 2wd F150. Is the Jeep Grand Cherokee truck or car based? It has a unbody construction but live axles. The 03 Range Rover is unibody with IRS and IFS, but it acually is more off-road worthy than the model it replaced even though you can make an argument it's car based. The market is getting too diverse to apply these simplistic labels anymore, IMHO.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    it's kinda a mute point cause I've seen several of these hoopties rollin around manhattan and they'll never see offroad duty with their Alcheeza tail lights.... :):)

    -mike
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    If it works, who cares what it's based on. Jeep does the off road well, that's all that counts. Does the 4 cyl Liberty get much better mileage though?
  • tincup47tincup47 Member Posts: 1,508
    Most Troopers don't see off road use either as is true for 95% of SUV's sold. I was referring to the capability built into the vehicle, not how it is actually used by the majority of consumers.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    I was just yankin your chain notice the :)

    My GF actually will probably buy one in a year or 2, apparently it's the car of choice for manhattan lawyers. But those alcheeza tail lights have to go!

    -mike
  • tincup47tincup47 Member Posts: 1,508
    While the lights aren't necessarily my favorite either, they are quite in fashion right now. I knew you were fooling with me, just like I was with you. ;)
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    Liberty is more "truck based" when comparing it to other utes in this class. Other utes in this class have fully independant front and rear suspensions, the jeep has independant front only. Also the jeep does have more of a "truck frame" in order to handle severe offroading situations. Other utes in this class have more of a "car frame" and cannot handle severe offroad situations. The frames can bend if they are over extended or twisted.
    Jeep Liberty, Nissan Xterra are about the only two you can take into the outdoors and really give a pounding to. However, stats show over 90% of consumers don't use thier vehicles this way and look for a nicer ride. Jeep and Nissan went for a niche market.
  • jogibajogiba Member Posts: 27
    My Ford Excursion 4x4 with 7.3L turbo diesel is the most truck based SUV available. It has a GCWR of 20,000lbs and a 44 gal fuel tank for a range longer than any 8/9 passerger vehicle.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    and the Excurision is probably worse offroad than even the worst offroader of the mini-utes! :)

    -mike
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    The Excursion has also been discontinued due to it's size and lack of sales.

    -mike
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    I'm sure the vast majority of soccer moms and business men that drive the Excursion don't care if it can go off road.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    But then why do they drive them? I think they have leaf springs in the front!!!

    I love SUVs but if I was buying an Excursion I'd get an extended FS van. Way more luxury, capacity and about 1/2 the price! Go figure.

    I think that GM is going to do well with it's FS AWD Vans. I can see them being very useful to replace a lot of the FS SUVs out there.

    -mike
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I'm with paisan on this one - the Liberty is a unibody, as is the Grand Cherokee. Even though they are still trucks, the author just picked a bad example, because it's become a lot more car-like. They should have used an XTerra.

    I'd like to think that my Forester combines the 4 wheel indy suspension from the Hummer with the unibody of the Grand Cherokee, and the VC AWD from the Freelander. ;-)

    My cousin rented a 15 passenger van for a trip to Oregon, and they filled it up and had a great time. He's got 3 kids, plus two other couples with 1 kid each went too. All 11 of them fit inside, no problem. Try that in an Excursion.

    -juice
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    I rented a Safari Van a few years ago to take 7 guys camping. Had an awsome trip cause we couldn't have fit that many people that comforably in any SUV except perhaps a Suburban, but then we would have gotten about 1/3 less gas milage.

    -mike
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    "But then why do they drive them?"

    I don't know, to look cool probably. You would have to ask them yourself.

    Me, I would get a FWD SUV if I bought one as I don't need AWD / 4WD to drive around the city / highways.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    FWD SUVs. We were just out at dinner joking about them last night. Saying they were basically like neutering a dog. These vehicles drive around with an empty spot where the rear diffy should be! :)

    -mike
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    There's one way to distinguish the car-based crowd. If the 2WD model is FWD, it usually started life as a car. If it's RWD, then most likely it's a truck.

    -juice
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    We all know, your Isuzu is the best thing in the world!
  • vuefor2vuefor2 Member Posts: 490
    Why do come here and make fun of small SUVs? You are always beating up on people for the terms or words they use and the vehicles they choose. Why is this any of your business anyway??

    Fact is most people don't need 4x4s and they buy these vehicles because they look good (unlike vans) and they can haul more than a car. Fact is most people don't care if it's a car or truck platform. Fact is, most people don't go off road.

    Stop bothering people and snickering all the time.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Awhhh c'mon I'm just joshing with you guys! Relax. And on a side note AWD is not only for offroading and snow/wet driving. Ask any of the subie guys here about how it changes the actual handling.

    -mike
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    I'm actually sure that you aren't joking and that what you say is exactly how you feel. That's fine but it's just not constructive so you are better off not "joking".
  • daveghhdaveghh Member Posts: 495
    I have 2002 crv and I have access to an Xterra to drive. I would much rather drive an XTerra when I went "off roading" and I would much rather drive and AWD vehicle like the CRV in the snow! Either the XTerra is in full four wheel drvie mode which is lousy above 30 mph and you have to switch between 4wd and 2wd just to drive around town or on curvy roads. Not my idea of convenience. BTW my crv kicked a 4wd Nissan Pickup truck *ss when we drove through a parking ot with snow above our bumper! No comparison!
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    I'm a big fan of mini-utes, they are perfect for their intended users actually, and safer for the rest of us than having tons of soccer moms driving around 7500lb Excursions needless and dangerously! :)

    -mike
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Funny you beat a probably unloaded pickup. With zero weight over it's rear wheels it's kind useless in 4wd. :)

    -mike
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    "And they look better than mini-vans" This is America and Image is most important to us, so I understand why so many people would rather have a "suv" than a "mini-van". :)

    -mike
  • daveghhdaveghh Member Posts: 495
    Paison,

    The unloaded pickup truck was unloaded and the rear wheels were essentially useless.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Exactly. Stick in a load and it would have been fine I'm sure. :)

    -mike
  • jaserbjaserb Member Posts: 820
    If you're talking about AWD in sedans/sports cars/station wagons, I agree that AWD has a noticeable effect even on dry pavement. With the possible exception of the Forester, however, I think the vehicles in this topic are unlikely to be pushed hard enough to make AWD matter as a handling aid: read the rollover warning on your visor before you argue with me. AWD in most mini-utes is purely there for traction when things get nasty. The Liberty/XTerra types with true 4wd also allow for off roading.

    -Jason
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I agree. Volvo hosted a Fire & Ice event where we were able to drive an S60 with/without AWD back-to-back. They felt notably different. The AWD was much better than the FWD+traction control on the wet acceleration test and also on the slalom. Even in steady-state cornering it has less understeer.

    But yeah, that matters to me more than it does to most mini ute buyers.

    -juice
  • vin_weaselvin_weasel Member Posts: 237
    I saw a whole bunch of posts so I thought someone must have said something...

    I always snicker when I get behind one of the mini-utes and the back end looks like >O< with a big hole in the middle. They don't even bother filling in the gap.

    Hey, I understand why people buy them but those that buy into the "mentality" of an SUV yet don't actually follow through on their purchase deserve a little ribbing.
  • vuefor2vuefor2 Member Posts: 490
    Well, our V6 Vue does have AWD but given the chance to buy a FWD, I think we would have as I don't think we need AWD. That said, perhaps it will come in handy some day.

    People should be free to buy what they want to suit their needs. If you want a "real SUV" (whatever that means), great. I just don't think there is a need to put down what they chose.
  • mtngalmtngal Member Posts: 1,911
    I'm a person that needs AWD/4x4 (mountain roads), but I know I'm in the minority. I've always thought that an SUV without at least AWD was just like the people that wander around here in surfer clothes, talking surfer talk and who can barely swim. But that is what sells around here - image. And why should someone be forced into buying something they don't need (not many around here need AWD/4x4)?

    I'm also a firm believer in the law of supply and demand. If something is popular, it costs more. So dealerships around here (except for Subaru) tend to only stock 2WD, and do a great business. I just wish that mini-SUVs weren't so popular - its driven up the cost to the point I can't afford one now, and will barely be able to get one next year!
  • jaserbjaserb Member Posts: 820
    My wife and I had a long discussion about this. When we bought our Santa Fe our dealer only had three in stock, a 4-cyl in that hideous brown color (no thanks), a silver AWD cloth with no ABS and a red FWD leather with ABS / TC - the last two had almost identical stickers. I wanted AWD, my wife wanted leather. Guess who won ;)
    Her argument was that we'd never use it to go anywhere we hadn't been in my Neon (you'd be surprised the places I took that thing!) but we'd constantly use the leather seats. My only rebuttal was "but... but... it's an SUV! It's GOTTA have four wheel drive!" We didn't get it, and I haven't missed it. When my dad found out we bought a 2WD he really started giving me crap - and not the kind of gentle digs Paisan has been dishing out! I finally shut him up by asking how many times he's even engaged the 4wd on his manly 4x4 Yukon. "Ummm... twice. And once was on the test drive to see how it worked!" He didn't give me a hard time after that.

    -Jason
  • jimbob17jimbob17 Member Posts: 77
    I had an 87 Subaru GL FWD before I got my 2003 Forester. That car took me to Penn State and back many times on I80 with snow covered roads and only me and truckers on the highway with no problem. It took me to trail heads to go hiking with a national environmental group with no problems. My two worries were negotiating roads with cotton snow (churned up before plowing) and losing the exhaust system on rutted trails. I assume the Forester with AWD and more clearance will alleviate most of those worrys. Am I wrong?
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    You should be fine. I wouldn't worry.

    Bob
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.