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

ateixeira · January 2006

Sounds good, I'm not surprised.

My wife actually got a test drive offer of some sort, so I will go try one out hopefully soon.

I like that it offers a low range, perhaps the only compact unibody to do so.

-juice

rsholland · January 2006

Only top 2 trim levels offer a low range. I wish all trim levels offered that feature. Even the manual tranny version only offers a high rangewhich is really dumb!

The good news is that AWD (full-time 4WD) is offered on all trim levels.

Bob

p0926 · January 2006

Subaru Forester is one of only 6 SUVs and the only small SUV to earn a good rating for protection against whiplash injuries in rear-end crashes.

Excerpts from article:

ARLINGTON, VA  Only 6 of the seat/head restraint combinations in 44 current model SUVs are rated good for protection against whiplash injuries in rear-end crashes. None of the seat/head restraint designs in 15 pickup truck models earns a good rating. Overall 4 out of 5 SUV and pickup seat/head restraints recently evaluated by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety are rated marginal or poor for whiplash protection. This is the first time the Institute has tested SUV and pickup seats using a dummy that can measure forces on the neck during a simulated rear-end crash.

Only the seats in the Ford Freestyle, Honda Pilot, Jeep Grand Cherokee, Land Rover LR3, Subaru Forester, and Volvo XC90 models earn good overall ratings.

"Manufacturer advertising often emphasizes the rugged image of SUVs and pickups," says Institute president Adrian Lund. "However, the Institute's evaluations show seats and head restraints in many models wouldn't do a good job of protecting most people in a typical rear impact in everyday commuter traffic."

Seat/head restraints in the Volvo XC90 and Subaru Forester earn good overall ratings, in part because of their advanced designs that help keep the head and torso moving together in a crash. As an occupant's torso sinks into the Subaru seat during a rear crash, a mechanism in the seatback is designed to push the head restraint up and toward the back of the head.

Full article is here: http://www.highwaysafety.org/news/2006/pr010806.html

-Frank

dstew1 · January 2006

I saw this on the national news the other night. In fact, I'm relatively certain whichever network I was watching showed the Forester's headrest as a good example of how one should be shaped in order to provide best protection from whiplash (they only showed the headrest, not the car, so it was impossible to identify for sure).

A lot of people find the Forester's headrest uncomfortable, complaining that it pushes their head forward - exactly what it's designed to do. Fortunately, I'm not one of these people; it suits me just fine.

Doug

era174 · January 2006

A few new owners of the new Santa Fe (that will be imported as the 2007 model to North America) in Korea filed formal complaints to the national consumer protection agency.

Their problmes are:

1) Noise & Vibration:
Much bigger than the previous years' models. Some said the rubber inside is a little weak and prone to wear earlier, in other words, CHEAP material. But, no definite reason has not yet been found.

2) PTTR (Pull To The Right):
This is a little serious.

Both the Santa Fe and the Kia Lotze (Optima in North America) have PTTR.

Seeing is believing, so...

mms://navernews.hvod.nefficient.co.kr/navernews/0004/2006/0111/00044799.wmv

\\ copy and paste the above link into the address bar of your browser or into the OPEN URL menu of your media player.

You don't need to understand Korean, just watch the video clip that speaks volumes.

One Hyundai representative said they complained because they had a "disease of the mind" (literal translation), in other words, "not a serious problem, they just over-reacted."

After watching the clip, I concluded the Hyundai rep had the "disease of the mind."

ateixeira · January 2006

It's normal to expect a few issues on a new model, I'm sure they'll iron them out. Remember, the 2004 Sonata was the most reliable car in CR's survey that year, bar none.

The Koreans are certainly capable, despite the poor example the rep displayed in that video.

-juice

ateixeira · January 2006

Well, wifey got a $25 gas card offer if we drove a Suzuki, so I went in yesterday to sample one of these, since I've been curious after Bob's glowing review.

All I can say is the vehicle seems like less than the sum of its parts. On paper, all the parts are there, low range, V6 standard, great warranty, decent space, adorable looks, ...but the actual test drive was a little disappointing.

The V6 is about as smooth as my blender chopping up ice. It's about a decade behind segment leaders in NVH control. Even worse, for all that noise you don't get satisfying results in term of forward thrust; the engine is merely adequate, no more.

And then the gas mileage is poor, c'mon Suzuki you can do better than this, just look at your bikes!

Handling was a bit soft for me, though the payoff in ride was good, a whole level better than the outgoing models were.

Interior gets good scores from me, some cheap plastics and thin carpets but that's par for this class. It didn't excel, but it didn't really fall behind either. Comfort levels were high.

The cargo area floor is a bit small, so you might have to stack your cargo. They should add a shelf or something like the Equinox has.

The warranty sounds great, but there just wasn't anything compelling about it to me. It will basically compete primarily on price, I felt.

-juice

dognut · January 2006

Ditto to everything you said....especially the soft handling and cheap interior. Once you have driven a Forester it's hard to drive a "soft" steerer!

rsholland · January 2006

You're, too used to driving cars.

This a truck, or maybe a "trucklet," and as such will never compare favorably with cars. Compare it to the out-going Grand Vitara and it is a quantum leap forward.

I've said it seemed like an industrial-strength CRV. That "industrial strength" means "truck-like," which means not "car-like." It will never ride or steer like a Forester. If it did it would be a car.

I do agree that I would like a larger, more powerful engine. It does have a timing chain, however, which I like.

Bob

ateixeira · January 2006

It is a quantum leap compared to the old one, I mentioned that. I guess if you had to have a low range, it is more refined than the last XTerra I drove.

Other issues I have with it that I remembered later are the curb-blocking rear gate (nuisance at Costco or the grocery store), plus the rear visibility isn't good. Neither is the RAV4 or CR-V, but get in a Forester and you can see everything.

-juice

xostnot · January 2006

Note that the '06 Grand Vitara was not listed simply because it wasn't tested.

nancylewis · February 2006

I am trying to decide among these three compact SUV's. I am a long-time Subaru Outback driver, but after some disc surgery in my neck, I really need to get some elevation for a better view of the road. IMO, nothing beats the Subaru AWD systems for safety, but I love the look and feel of the Jeep Liberty. I have been trying to get past the marketing hype to figure out the differences among the AWD options of these three SUVs. Here's what I understand so far: (1) The Subaru is full time true AWD with potentially each wheel having separate torque applied at any time, with the default position being 50% front wheels, 50% rear wheels. (2) the Ford Escape appears to default to 2WD (front wheel drive), until the sensor detects that there is a need for some torque to be applied to the slipping rear wheel(s). The Ford Escape also permits you to switch into true 4WD for off-road driving. (3) The Jeep Liberty Limited has the optional SelectTrac, which, according to the marketing literature, would give me the option of full time AWD. The Liberty, like the Escape, also permits you to slip into true 4WD, high or low, for off road driving. Can anyone tell me the differences among these three AWD systems. Again, I am not necessarily looking for 4WD, but rather for a true AWD system, similar to the Subaru. Thanks

dclark2 · February 2006

Checkout the new '06 Grand Vitara- it has two awd systems, a regular one and a four mode one. The latter will put Sube to shame.
High range is used most of the time. It is for most snow or mud. High range lock gives more traction for snow/mud.
Low range lock is extra traction for very difficult situations (I think this brings in a lower gear for hill climbing).
Neutral is for towing.
It also has vehicle stabilization w/abs. I think the power split is 45/55 f/r. Also, the GV has a 50/50 weight balance which will help stability. And, for extra strength, it is a unibody with a ladder frame welded to it, so it should be great on patches of real bumpy icey road. I test drove one four hours ago and was impressed. At a price of $24,500 before rebates, it'll be way cheaper than a compable sube.
As for "true" awd, only sube and suzi have it.The other systems like Ford, Equi/Torrent/ CRV are really automatic part time systems. Some are rather slow (like the GM system). However, the Honda real time system supposedly kicks in after the front wheels spin 1/4 turn. I had a first gen crv and it did great around Lake Tahoe. Mind you, this replaced my Audi quattro, which had a great awd.
My jetta has esp and despite being fwd, with the help of goodyear triple treads, does as well as the crv or audi, unless the snow gets too deep. ESP is really incredible in the snow! My advice is to get a vehicle with esp and don't worry whether the vehicle has true awd or one of the automatic part time systems (like the CRV or VUE). Go test a 'ute with esp and awd when it is snowing or real wet outside. Both the CRV and GV have esp . The awd will keep you from getting stuck, but it won't keep you on the road like ESP.
I won't even mention the Rav as comparably equipped, can cost $5000 more than the other vehicles.

scape2 · February 2006

Since you have included the Escape on your hunt for a small SUV.. Check out the Mazda Tribute and the Mercury Mariner too! My wife and I own both a Tribute and an Escape. The Tribute has more sporty ride and feel, the Escape is more truck like feel.
As far as offroad and 4x4 systems. I have had both the Escape and Tribute buried in the snow and they have done just fine. However, if you are and outdoors person who finds the 4x4 trails more your lifestyle.. I have to say the Jeep Liberty is more for you. Liberty is only 1 of a few of these small utes that truely has the frame for serious offroading.. Let us know what you choose!

ateixeira · February 2006

Escape has a 4WD lock button for temporary use on slippery pavement, but I wouldn't call it "true 4WD for off roading", that's a bit of a stretch.

Having said that, I think it would meet your needs just fine, and it does sit higher than the Forester (seat hip point).

-juice

explorerx4 · February 2006

actually, the escape is now electronic AWD. it is a different system '05 and up.

ttandjj · February 2006

I have driven all of the vehicles that you have mentioned. My personal preference, in your case, would be the Subaru. I own a Jeep Liberty CRD. It is a great vehicle. However, if you recently had back or neck surgery, the Liberty is gonna be hard on your spine. IMO, the Ford Escape and Mercury similars are not built very well (very rattlely). Just my 2 cents.

explorerx4 · February 2006

our 2 year old escape has an intermitent rattle somewhere in the back. it developed after it was hit from behind by another vehicle.

scape2 · February 2006

"IMO, the Ford Escape and Mercury similars are not built very well (very rattlely). Just my 2 cents.
Humm.. thats funny. After owning an 01 Escape XLT V6 4x4 for over 4 years now, I have one very small squeak in the right corner of my windshield on really cold days.. thats it! And.. I tow with my Escape, visit fishing places in the Cascade range, and skii. So my Escape has had its fair share of work-outs over its lifetime.. Oh, before you say "I'm lucky, or its one in a million" or " very few are build that way" We also own a 04 Tribute ES V6 4x4.. No squeaks or rattles on that one either.. Cheers...

p0926 · February 2006

And of course 2 in a million is much better odds :P

bvcrd · February 2006

One reason we chose the Liberty CRD was the Selectrac. It has a part time , full time and of course the 4 low settings. The part time is good if you see some black ice up ahead or just need some help getting rolling away from an incline at a stop light but you don't want to run it in that on the dry. The full time is exactly that. Run it if you want but loose fuel economy. I didn't like the Escapes version mainly be I wanted to be in control of the system and not rely on some switch or electronics to fail me. And, the Escape seemed like an under powered 4x4 car.....not for me.

sap1 · March 2006

After noticing rust on the back wheel wells of my 2001 I tried to get ford to help correct. Was totally blown off by Michigan. Body man stated bad metal and would be cost prohibitve to fix. Have had numerous issues with car only has 58K. Very poor gas mileage, wiper quit bad wheel bearing and now noise from front end when turning. Idon't trust this piece of junk. In addition does not heat or cool
very well. I plan to get a toyota very soon.

ateixeira · March 2006

There is a special paint that you can use to paint over rust, it's expensive ($80/gallon) but supposedly it works. Might want to look into that.

Rust will hurt the resale value even if you do trade.

-juice

scape2 · March 2006

What region do you live in?

swannee · March 2006

Just sold my 1998 Ford Explorer Sport 2WD - it had 210,000 miles. It was a champ, not a scratch, no major mechanical issues. I thought it was a solid-quality SUV. Just bought a Jeep Liberty Ltd, all tricked out with heated, leather seats, sunroof, ...Can't believe how they've upgraded all the bells & whistles! Hope this SV is as good as my Explorer!

sap1 · March 2006

Northeast Ohio near Canton

scape2 · March 2006

Reason I ask is I live in probably the wetest region in the U.S. (Pacific Northwest) and my 01 Escape has no rust at all.. Can this rust be attributed to salt on your roads?
Another reason I ask is rust on cars past about 1990 is something I never really hear about anylonger, from any make/brand. With the metal/frame dipping used, along with paint technology has pretty much made rust on vehicles a thing of the past.. :confuse:

ateixeira · March 2006

In the NE they do use chemicals to melt the snow, it's pretty nasty. You end up with a white film on the outside of your vehicle.

I remember spending some time in Taos, NM, and they just added sand on top of the snow. No chemicals used to melt it. I think it was because a lot of people drink well water and the chemicals contaminate it.

I agree though, most steel is now galvanized so this is less of an issue nowadays.

-juice

stever · March 2006

Automobile rust perforation "has dropped from 90 percent in 1976 to just 20 percent in 1980. By 1990, the percentage of rust perforation dropped to only 6 percent." Galvanized steel is a big factor in the reduction, as Juice mentioned.

Lots more at the Salt Institute.

Steve, Host

ateixeira · March 2006

Thanks for the interesting link.

1990 was 16 years ago, so the number should even be a lot lower now, maybe half that 6%.

-juice

stever · March 2006

When I lived in AK salt was used to keep the sand from freezing so they could spread it. That was ok, but the more enlightened states and provinces store the salt/sand mix in barns on top of impermeable surfaces so the stuff won't leach. I knew a guy whose well was ruined by an unprotected salt pile a half mile away.

The actual concentration spread on the roads must not have been too bad since cars don't seem any rustier up there anymore than anywhere else.

We gave a ski bum a lift to his '87 Legacy the other day and it had a bunch of rust on the fender wells. Things have changed!

Steve, Host

ateixeira · March 2006

Loyale, probably? I don't think the Legacy came out until '90. Loyales did tend to rust.

-juice

stever · March 2006

All I could see was the L - the rest was rusted off, LOL.

Steve, Host

ateixeira · March 2006

Yeah, but they kept running, it was wild.

My cousin had one with 144k miles, ended up selling it to her nephew to get a new Outback. AFAIK it's still going.

-juice

stever · March 2006

Actually it looked in pretty good shape. A few kisses, some rust at the top of the wheel wells and a missing hubcap. I think the guy said it had 187k on it.

Varmint just posted an interesting link about safety numbers that tire kickers concerned about safety may want to look at:

Informed For Life

Steve, Host

kutyafal · July 2006

I actually took the 2006 Grand Vitara into the "rough" during a recent test drive. It did very well! Check out my full post here.

done37 · August 2006

Hi, New to this forum and noticed this old but interesting post. Being that it is an old post, the subject has veered a bit of course. I will lend a hand to get it back on course by offering some scintillating biased reporting on why I would chose the Forester. The Forester XT to be more succinct. Turbocharged and offroad capability gives this sport ute an advantage. Runs with Mustangs, slings Mud with Jeeps, Luxuriates with the Lexus(premium package

) and is as reliable as a Honda. Drive one today, you won't disagree.

tidester · August 2006

The Forester XT to be more succinct.

If you're using more words then, by definition, it is less succinct - but it is definitely more precise!

tidester, host

done37 · August 2006

"If you're using more words then, by definition, it is less succinct - but it is definitely more precise"!

Ouch. Point well taken.

Thanks,
Don
Newbie

kdshapiro · August 2006

"and is as reliable as a Honda"

Actually it is more reliable than a Honda. I remember reading the Forester is one of the single most reliable cars out there.

ateixeira · August 2006

From the last CR annual auto issue, the Forester beat the average Honda, and every single Acura model. But the CR-V actually eeks out the Forester if you're looking at that class only.

Doesn't matter, we're splitting hairs here. All models mentioned are reliable.

-juice

xostnot · August 2006

I'm not sure how the Forrester can be better offroad than the Grand Vitara given that you can't get a low range gearing on the Subaru.

done37 · August 2006

Given that the Suzuki does have Low range gearing, it is probably a better off-roader. However, the Forester XT has the lowest first gear if I am not mistaken in the subaru lineup(manual), and the torque of the turbo helps.

rsholland · August 2006

Inside Line tests the new RAV4, CX7 and Santa Fe.

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=116618

Bob

kdshapiro · August 2006

Actually I'll split a hair or two with you. After reviewing CRs statistics, I say the hair goes to the Forester, if you are reviewing the last two or three years. For 2005, you trade off 1 black circle on Body Integrity on the Subie with 2 half red circles on the Honda... one on suspension and the other on Body Integrity.

You pick it.

Ken

xostnot · August 2006

If you haven't had a large meal recently, you might want to check the comsumer safety complaints about the Forester on the NHTSA website.

kdshapiro · August 2006

I don't really care about these types of items.

1. There is no independent verification of the facts, so people can write anything about any model.
2. The entire story is never revealed by the complaintant, so you don't know even if there is a grain of truth in the complaint, if something ridiculously illegal and/or stupid was going on at the time.

Case in point: I remember a post on the 3 series board a while back, where the poster was saying how unbalanced the car was. Going 25 on a straight paved dry road sunny day no traffic, the car "suddenly" started fishtailing? or something else. Poster claims he/she lost control and landed in a ditch. Result car is a POS and a deathtrap. How many would actually believe that story?

I also believe that someone stupid enough (and I don't underestimate the stupidity of the American driver), could get a car into the worst of situations, and blame it on the car.

done37 · August 2006

The complaint section of the NHTSA website is questionable at best, even hilarious at times. I have pretty much looked at the NHTSA website every time I purchased a car. Here is a link to the complaints on a 2005 Honda CRV.

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/problems/complain/results.cfm

Not that I am picking on Honda, just proving the point that every car and truck out there can be pummeled with unsubstantiated complaints

stever · August 2006

If enough "unsubstantiated" complaints come in, the NHTSA starts seeing a trend. If there's a real safety concern, it probably doesn't take too many complaints to warrant further investigation.

Just like reading the posts on here; it doesn't take much to weed out the venting and dubious comments but you do start seeing issues repeat themselves for certain makes/models.

done37 · August 2006

Your absolutley right, a few of those complaints can actually turn into problems, TSB's and even recalls, but most stay unsubstantiated. To use the complaint section as a research tool on your next purchase or a barometer for the reliability of a particular car is ill advised in my opinion is all.

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

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles