Small to Mid Size SUV

[undercoverbrother]

I am in the market for a small to mid size SUV. I will be doing plenty of highway driving come hockey season.

I would apprecaite any and all feedback on any and all models.

I have no real brand preferance.

[blankall]

There was already a very similar thread:

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=116501

I've been looking at the same type of vehicles. From what I've read the Mazdas CX-5 looks like a great choice. The problem with cross-over/small SUVs is that they are often underpowered and no fun to drive. Apparently the CX-5 doesn't suffer from those problems.

For budget vehicles I'd also take a look at the:

Mistubishi RVR
Hyundai Tuscon
Ford Edge
Chevy Equinox

If you are spending more money I'd go:

Subaru Outback
Volvo XC
Acura RDX
Infiniti EX

Have no first hand experience with any of these vehicles other than the Acura RDX, which my father owns. That thing was a lot of fun to drive. I'm hoping to begin test drivign vehicles in the near future, so any information I'm giving is based on second hand research.

[Byrns]

I have a 2011 V6 RAV4. It's not underpowered and a pretty fun drive imho.

[Table 5]

From all accounts I've read the CX-5 is the enthusiasts choice in the cute-ute segment (if you ignore the fact that an enthusiast would actually get a sporty wagon before he ever gets a crossover).

[93Hound]

I currently own a 2008 Ford Escape 4x4 and I had my son in Hockey and daughter in Ringette. We seemed to do just fine with that vehicle for 3 years.
We are currently wanting ot see it and get a 7 passanger vehicle.
If your interested, PM me and we can talk

[bizaro86]

I drive an '09 Sante Fe. (The limited, which has 7 seats). We've really liked it, and the 3.3 L definitely has a reasonable amount of oomph for passing on the highway.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Byrns

I have a 2011 V6 RAV4. It's not underpowered and a pretty fun drive imho.

The problem with the v6 rav4 is that is kills any fuel economy by adding the V6. This is normally a big consideration for people looking at small SUVs/cross-overs (otherwise they'd be looking at regular SUVs).

This seems to be a major problem with Toyotas right now. The base model is fuel efficient yet underpowered. The turbo versions are faster but the fuel efficiency is totally killed. Unlike vehicles like Mazdas, they haven't worked out a good compromise yet.

That being said, the Toyota Rav4s are cheap and have great lease rates.

[Old Yeller]

My wife is looking at a new used car for herself. She seems to like the Nissan Rogues but she hasn't test driven one yet... anyone have any experience/opinion on it?

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Originally Posted by Table 5

From all accounts I've read the CX-5 is the enthusiasts choice in the cute-ute segment (if you ignore the fact that an enthusiast would actually get a sporty wagon before he ever gets a crossover).

The trouble now is finding options that have the manual transmission...unless you want to go european...

-Audi's A3, A4, A6
-BMW wagons
-Volvo V50 T5
-Forester XT (used)
-Volvo v70R (used)

I'm really interested in the CX-5...I'm just waiting to see if they will offer a manual transmission in the diesel version.

Of course the CTS-V wagon is the ultimate choice

[Table 5]

Yeah, it's hard to find a manual these days, which is always a shame (and my one deal-breaker for any car i personally drive).

I still think wagons are a better choice than any cute ute though...even if an automatic. They tend to have just as much space (if not more) while still giving you the driving characteristics of a car (it's hard to fight gravity when you're on stilts). Plus they weight less, so fuel economy tends to be better too.

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Yeah, it's hard to find a manual these days, which is always a shame (and my one deal-breaker for any car i personally drive).

I still think wagons are a better choice than any cute ute though...even if an automatic. They tend to have just as much space (if not more) while still giving you the driving characteristics of a car (it's hard to fight gravity when you're on stilts). Plus they weight less, so fuel economy tends to be better too.

A lot of wagons around the same price of the cute ute, as you call them, don't have all wheel drive. I think that is a big reason a lot of people are buying crossovers. Plus the selection of wagons to crossovers it's even close.

[Red John]

The Acura RDX is a terrific vehicle...the woman took it out for a test drive and continues to rave over it a year later...used to have a turbo-charged 4-banger under the hood but now apparently has adopted the MDX engine (V6) which is an even better one...the folks have a MDX and couldn't be happier with it.

If price is a concern, check out the Chev Equinox...it was car of the year in 2010 (?) and offers great bang for the buck.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Burninator

A lot of wagons around the same price of the cute ute, as you call them, don't have all wheel drive. I think that is a big reason a lot of people are buying crossovers. Plus the selection of wagons to crossovers it's even close.

Unfortunately a lot of companies out there are only offering premium wagons these days, which obviously drives more people to other options....leading to even less wagons to choose from. Kind of a crappy deal for us wagon fans.

For most people, all wheel drive is over-rated in my opinion. Stability control (standard in all new cars in the US, unsure about Canada) and some decent winter tires (which you should have regardless of all-wheel drive) is more than enough in most scenarios. It's funny how people turn into rugged mountaineering woodsmen as soon as they go car shopping.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Burninator

A lot of wagons around the same price of the cute ute, as you call them, don't have all wheel drive. I think that is a big reason a lot of people are buying crossovers. Plus the selection of wagons to crossovers it's even close.

That is definitely the problem. It's too bad that lame segment took off. It makes no sense whatsoever.

[Byrns]

Originally Posted by blankall

The problem with the v6 rav4 is that is kills any fuel economy by adding the V6. This is normally a big consideration for people looking at small SUVs/cross-overs (otherwise they'd be looking at regular SUVs).

This seems to be a major problem with Toyotas right now. The base model is fuel efficient yet underpowered. The turbo versions are faster but the fuel efficiency is totally killed. Unlike vehicles like Mazdas, they haven't worked out a good compromise yet.

That being said, the Toyota Rav4s are cheap and have great lease rates.

A lot of the more performance minded small SUVs require premium fuel including the up powered Mazdas. Not sure if there's much of a savings vs. regular that the V6 RAV4 uses.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Byrns

A lot of the more performance minded small SUVs require premium fuel including the up powered Mazdas. Not sure if there's much of a savings vs. regular that the V6 RAV4 uses.

Well my point was more the Mazda CX-5 does not need to be up powered to get a good driving experience. The base model itself creates a nice compromise between fuel economy and driving experience. The Toyota's on the other hand provide more extremes. You are forced to trade off drivign experience for fuel economy with little middle ground.

In terms of fuel economy, the mazda CX-5 gets 26mpg and 35 mpg, which they claim is the leader in its class. Initial reviews also praise the vehicle for its drivign experience.

As a long time Toyota driver, I can attest to how boring the experience is with the base models....although fuel economy is great.

[Northendzone]

is a crossover a consideration? ford edge, toyota venza, honda crosstour, aucra something or other.

[Street Pharmacist]

Just bought a GMC Terrain yesterday. I know the guy I bought it from personally, so he let me have it for two days first. I don't pull anything, so the 4-cylinder is plenty good for me. It's rated 46mpg on the highway, i was getting about 38 which is still great. I figured out how many kms i average each year and the difference between this and the V6 was about $650 a year, which is significant. The AWD is also not necessary for me as i don't go off-road. In the end for me it was about comfort, space (new little Street Pharmacist due July 6th) and price. The Terrain has backup camera, satellite radio etc. as standard, so that was the kicker for me. 28,000 over 72 months @ 0%. I'd normally be against that length of loan, but at 0%, it is free money

[Shin Pad]

Originally Posted by Byrns

A lot of the more performance minded small SUVs require premium fuel including the up powered Mazdas. Not sure if there's much of a savings vs. regular that the V6 RAV4 uses.

I agree with this. When I was looking around for an SUV, the ones that had enough power for highway driving, were all Turbo models which required premium gas. So, any savings these vehicles have with respect to gas milage, go out the window when you have to pay more for premium gas. My RAV4 V6, has 269 HP and it runs on regular fuel. I do a lot of highway driving, so this is ideal for me. I won't recommend a regular 4 cyliinder engine for highway driving. If you are doing mostly city driving, then just get a regular 4 cylinder engine (not a turbo).

Also, the gas milage with my V6 is still pretty good.

[JBR]

Originally Posted by Old Yeller

My wife is looking at a new used car for herself. She seems to like the Nissan Rogues but she hasn't test driven one yet... anyone have any experience/opinion on it?

I bought a 2011 Rogue last September and love it. Fun to drive and has a fair bit of zip, even though it's a 4cyl FWD. Back-up camera, sunroof, bluetooth, iPod etc. Great value and the gas mileage is good, especially on the hwy.