Author Topic: 2014 Rav4, CR-V or Escape (Read 40802 times)

johngenx · « **Reply #40 on:** October 30, 2014, 04:27:34 pm »

Toyota basically uses the AT-only system Subaru used back in the early 2000's save for it can operate in a complete FWD mode where Subaru's system applied power to the rears at all times. Reading the programming specs (adds power when and where) it sounds exactly like the Subaru system of way-back.

And hey, that's a good system. My own Forester has it, though my car has the huge advantage of a rear LSD that completely transforms the way it drives in low traction conditions. Hooon-city!!!

The newest Subaru systems (60:40, 50:50, and 45:55-VTD) are still about the best on the market for on-road applications. One thing Subaru has NAILED that Toyota does not is making electronic nannies work with an AWD system. Subaru's system gives the driver quite a bit of room, where Toyota's intervenes early and HARD. I know Toyota can do better, as the IS350 AWD I drove wasn't nearly as fun-quashing, but on their mass market models, wow, does it ever go into "oh NO you don't" mode fast.

EV-Light · « **Reply #41 on:** October 30, 2014, 04:30:30 pm »

Quote from: NoTo on October 30, 2014, 04:18:35 pm

Quote from: Tauri13 on October 30, 2014, 04:04:01 pm
here...AMCI conducted an interesting testing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orysh1VuueU
*calm meditating*
issues with the above video:
1) OEM all-season tires.
2) maximum '0.5s' difference.
3) driver seemingly 'flooring it'.

I mean, whether floored or not, they clearly were trying to see which could accelerate faster. The test was inherently the most moronic way to drive on ice.

I don't doubt that the Venza's AWD system is capable, but that test determines very, very little, and in fact, is irresponsible IMO.

As stated by john, Toyota has significantly updated its AWD systems and now it's always 90:10 (i.e. the rears are always engaged on start), but other than accelerating, Subaru's 60:40 system will be more planted and predictable.

blotter · « **Reply #42 on:** October 30, 2014, 04:32:14 pm »

I'll add to what John / Tauri13 and NOTO

having had a 2009 RAV-4 and a 1999 Subaru Forester.

one of the greatest things people think about Subie's AWD is how amazing it is in the winter.
the system is not just great in the winter (going skiing I was a tank) but also general grip.
might not be a big deal on a nice summer day (especially for the average driver)
However, Subaru's AWD was also great on drives that got heavy rains, cool fall / spring evenings or days with damp pavement. The vehicle just seems to ALWAYS feel planted unless you drove stupid.

meanwhile the RAV - all the crazy weather we've had going skiing I almost never had an issue.
again, as John said - the system on take off is actually very good.
I got stuck just off the road in a storm which had half a foot of snow on the road and 2 feet off it.
it was blasting heavy flakes and the RAV sat on a depressed shoulder which dropped (curved) down 3 to 4 feet off the road. I threw it in low, locked the 4x4 and after just one rocking back and forth she climbed right out back on the road. Now why was I off the road in the first place? I admit, going a little too fast, a curve in the road and some odd solo track grabbed the tires and pulled us hard off the road.
For some reason I think the Subie system would have done a better job keeping us on the road, but also I should have been driving a tad slower. But what I really think hurt me is what John said: where Toyota's intervenes early and HARD The traction control quickly killed the power and it took an extra second to overide it (by hitting the gas harder) and that was enough to keep my moving through the tracks that lead off the road

Needless to say, for 95% of the time both system will do their job and be satisfactory.
I've driven in storms that have shut the highways down south of Buffalo and both vehicles were champs (aside from that one time

)

Ex-airbalancer · « **Reply #43 on:** October 30, 2014, 04:35:21 pm »

Get a Ram 1500 crew cab, end of story

Serniter · « **Reply #44 on:** October 30, 2014, 04:37:27 pm »

Quote from: NoTo on October 30, 2014, 04:10:42 pm

Quote from: Serniter on October 30, 2014, 03:51:16 pm
The no stress decision would be to do what Tauri13 suggested: get a '14 Rav4. Reliable, good dealer support, and easy to resell if you need to.
First, let me say that my list of cars to drive was in no particular order. I limited my list to only 4 cars because more than that in one day is exhausting and will not be helpful.

Also, I think things are getting a little too 'big' for what Harpster originally stated. It's replacing an Elantra NOT because they need larger, but because it was totalled in a rear-ender and she wants to sit up higher for a feeling of safety. In other words, she is looking for a 'safer' car. I would argue that safety is sort of the priority, and on that basis, there is some detraction from the benefit of the Rav4 given its IIHS showings. Even after the IIHS gave Toyota a break to "make last minute changes for the small-overlap test", it failed MISERABLY. Sure, it's just one test, but I would argue that the others that perform better are safer all-around cars given that most accidents do not occur identically to lab-simulated tests.

In any event, I'm not trying to be a proponent for any one brand. We have discussed the issue of a FWD CUV far too much and I'm pretty sure we almost all universally agreed that for resale reasons alone, they make no sense. With that being said, we know the driver of this new vehicle is "short", is used to an Elantra (though won't drive a Hyundai product again so the Tucson is out), and wants a CUV. I think putting in the Venza, Forester, and CX-5 are not in her better interest given their sizes (or width, which make them drive larger than one would be used to). The Elantra's dimensions are:
178" long
69.9" wide

The CX-5, on the other hand:
178.7" long (good)
72.4" wide (bad)

Crosstrek:
175.2" long
70.1" wide

While ya'll can argue that 2.3" isn't much, I beg to differ. ...and as for the Venza:
189" long
75.0" wide

Let's drop that thought right...meow. Thanks.

Like I said, the Escape, which is the original question in this thread, is a good option. By size, it's the perfect CUV step-up. My concern is for outward visibility, relative safety, and relative reliability. Also, given the vehicle's intended use (commuter <10km each way), the 2.0T will use a lot of gas and the 1.6T is plagued with reliability issues as described herein. I think it should be considered, but I don't think it fits the bill. Imagine paying for maintenance/repairs once the vehicle is out of warranty AND you're still paying monthly for finance payments! Fricken OUCH. I mean, you'll get that with any car, but I somehow doubt that 7 recalls in one year will just 'go away'.

I've tried to be neutral in all of this and not point in any one direction. In MY opinion, the Crosstrek is a great 'step-up-to-CUV' size and will fit the bill otherwise. I think the Rav4 is a decent choice as well, and the CRV keeps earning high 5s from auto journalists this year after it got a new powertrain. So, those are my top 3 choices. I added in the Cherokee because the interior is really well executed and the size is good. I don't like the 9-speed, but tooscoops may have a point about "learned" behaviours and I could be wrong.

So, I don't care which 4 you testdrive, Harpster, but choose 4, don't buy that day, and come back and report about what you think

/rant.

All good points, but why the "/rant"? I was not aware of the Rav4's dismal safety record. The Venza is large, but the CX-5? Sure it is 2.5" wider than an Elantra, but does it feel large to drive? The CRV is wide as well. The Crosstrek does seem like a good fit, although the dealer network may not be as extensive as for the Honda or Toyota. Also, how elevated is the seating position in the Crosstrek? Is it closer to a car or a CUV (such as CRV/Rav4)? The list looks considerably shorter now: Crosstrek, CRV, and I would still give the CX-5 a chance.

blotter · « **Reply #45 on:** October 30, 2014, 05:01:11 pm »

the crosstrek has a higher seating position like a CUV
most people who have tested it / own it, have raved about the great visibility.

If you have a local dealer or one reasonably close, I wouldn't be concerned too much about the network.

I now have a dealer again in Niagara but at one time I had to drive 45 minutes to Hamilton.

tooscoops · « **Reply #46 on:** October 30, 2014, 05:49:03 pm »

as much as i should steer towards the product i sell.. i really am a fan of the crosstrek.

again, worth a look, but first do a build and price to make sure it would at least be possible. i believe as mentioned, subaru will only do 60 month subvented financing. you can get a 96 month term through a bank at the dealer i am sure, but the rate will be in the 5.99% type range. really affects the end payment. probably end up about 400 for an auto touring...

whereas a cherokee sport with cold weather group will set you back about 350 a month for 96 months. get the 4x4 same thing for about 375.

i'm sure most cars in this class will be very close in payments for similar cars.

Harpster · « **Reply #47 on:** October 30, 2014, 06:05:14 pm »

These are all great points ppl! Very much appreciated. Yes I/we have changed our minds more than our underwear.

I know very little about the buying process and feel like a turtle on its back at times.

As mentioned, the only vehicle we have taken out on the road is the Escape today. The ride is smooth but the interior is meh. The screen is too small and too far away for my liking.

Rav seems to be MY choice but that's on looks and reputation only. Have yet to drive it which might change me mind since I have heard it's very rough.

I just don't want to make a mistake. Nothing is more expensive than regret.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sir Osis of Liver · « **Reply #48 on:** October 30, 2014, 09:36:48 pm »

I'm still very happy with the CrossTrek. Very good fuel economy, very good outward visibility, very good interior room for its footprint, and with snowtires, it's a beast in the winter. It does give up some cargo room, some may find it underpowered, and you have to decide whether you like the engine noise or not, but you can't have it all.

A++ would buy again.

johngenx · « **Reply #49 on:** October 30, 2014, 09:44:44 pm »

Quote from: Sir Osis of Liver on October 30, 2014, 09:36:48 pm

I'm still very happy with the CrossTrek.

You also have the cool purple colour!!

Sir Osis of Liver · « **Reply #50 on:** October 30, 2014, 09:52:41 pm »

Quote from: johngenx on October 30, 2014, 09:44:44 pm

Quote from: Sir Osis of Liver on October 30, 2014, 09:36:48 pm
I'm still very happy with the CrossTrek.

You also have the cool purple colour!!

Yup. Bugger to keep clean, but looks quite nice when it is.

Noto · « **Reply #51 on:** October 31, 2014, 10:15:17 am »

Quote from: Harpster on October 30, 2014, 06:05:14 pm

I know very little about the buying process and feel like a turtle on its back at times.

As mentioned, the only vehicle we have taken out on the road is the Escape today. The ride is smooth but the interior is meh. The screen is too small and too far away for my liking.

Rav seems to be MY choice but that's on looks and reputation only. Have yet to drive it which might change me mind since I have heard it's very rough.

That's what we're here for - I mean, most of us

we're trying to help, though we tend to bicker a little (just a tad. maybe a bit more than we should...right, honey?)

I think the most effective thing you can do for us to help you (that was a mouthfull...) is say what you like/dislike about a car. Hearing that you liked the way that the Escape drove, but weren't fond of the interior (far away screen/small) shows what is important to you. On that basis, the Crosstrek may fail (since in base Touring trim, it doesn't have a screen at all! I personally prefer the simpler layout and find that these screens are problematic, but I leave it to you to determine).

The screen placement has long been the Escape's demise for many - especially with MyFord Touch, the bottom left corner is impossible to reach for the driver.

The Rav4 may very well be the right choice for you, but remember who will be driving it. Let her do 90% of the testdrive (and let her drive first). Try the next batch - Rav4, CRV, and Crosstrek, and come back and let us know what you liked/didn't.

Short of spending $100,000 on a car, it's unlikely that one car will be "perfect" in every way for you. To buy a car on a 96-month lease shows that finances are important to you and, accordingly, you will have to make some concessions. That's where I view all of the above to be good choices - they excel in some ways, detract in others. Take a look and let us know!

Noto · « **Reply #52 on:** October 31, 2014, 10:16:38 am »

...and my sole and only complaint of the CX-5 is that it drives HUGE (I felt uncomfortable driving it despite its length and height being shorter than the Forester I drive). Chalk it down to the thick pillars, cut-back styling, all-black interior, and width.

It's my opinion, and she may not care - but MIL cared a lot and she's a huge Mazda slappie.

EV-Light · « **Reply #53 on:** October 31, 2014, 10:28:33 am »

Quote from: Harpster on October 30, 2014, 06:05:14 pm

These are all great points ppl! Very much appreciated. Yes I/we have changed our minds more than our underwear.

I know very little about the buying process and feel like a turtle on its back at times.

As mentioned, the only vehicle we have taken out on the road is the Escape today. The ride is smooth but the interior is meh. The screen is too small and too far away for my liking.

Rav seems to be MY choice but that's on looks and reputation only. Have yet to drive it which might change me mind since I have heard it's very rough.

I just don't want to make a mistake. Nothing is more expensive than regret.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am assuming the unit you tested didn't have MyFord Touch...was the interior like this?

Harpster · « **Reply #54 on:** October 31, 2014, 10:34:21 am »

Quote from: Tauri13 on October 31, 2014, 10:28:33 am

Quote from: Harpster on October 30, 2014, 06:05:14 pm
These are all great points ppl! Very much appreciated. Yes I/we have changed our minds more than our underwear.

I know very little about the buying process and feel like a turtle on its back at times.

As mentioned, the only vehicle we have taken out on the road is the Escape today. The ride is smooth but the interior is meh. The screen is too small and too far away for my liking.

Rav seems to be MY choice but that's on looks and reputation only. Have yet to drive it which might change me mind since I have heard it's very rough.

I just don't want to make a mistake. Nothing is more expensive than regret.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am assuming the unit you tested didn't have MyFord Touch...was the interior like this?

That looks VERY different than my rental. Here is the one I rented:

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

EV-Light · « **Reply #55 on:** October 31, 2014, 11:34:29 am »

Quote from: Harpster on October 30, 2014, 06:05:14 pm

That looks VERY different than my rental. Here is the one I rented:

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh you had the base model! the bigger screen and back-up camera are a $1300.00 option on the SE and standard on the Titanium. I particular dislike Fords' interior without the big touch screen...

blotter · « **Reply #56 on:** October 31, 2014, 11:41:26 am »

Quote

Yes I/we have changed our minds more than our underwear.

don't worry about that. Been there, done that!

Noto · « **Reply #57 on:** October 31, 2014, 11:55:15 am »

Quote from: Harpster on October 31, 2014, 10:34:21 am

That looks VERY different than my rental. Here is the one I rented:

well, yah...MyFordTouch is not a small screen, but it's not 'perfect', either.

If you otherwise liked the Escape, then option it the way you want it and see if you can handle the price. I built an SE 1.6T 4WD with MyFord Touch (cheapest you could get). The longest term offered is 72 months and it's $584/month at 5.59% APR.

!

EV-Light · « **Reply #58 on:** October 31, 2014, 11:59:50 am »

Quote from: NoTo on October 31, 2014, 11:55:15 am

Quote from: Harpster on October 31, 2014, 10:34:21 am
That looks VERY different than my rental. Here is the one I rented:
well, yah...MyFordTouch is not a small screen, but it's not 'perfect', either.

If you otherwise liked the Escape, then option it the way you want it and see if you can handle the price. I built an SE 1.6T 4WD with MyFord Touch (cheapest you could get). The longest term offered is 72 months and it's $584/month at 5.59% APR. !

NoTo, the Escape in question is a 2015...
if Harpster is really interested in the Escape and wants a 2015, he/she should wait another month or so when Ford will FOR SURE throw in discounts and low financing rates.

He can get good deals for the 2014 leftovers...I read somewhere (local newspaper) Ford has the 72m rate at 1.99%

Noto · « **Reply #59 on:** October 31, 2014, 12:03:08 pm »

I'm not so into buying leftovers...you're basically saying "depreciation? Who gives a f*ck."

You easily pay for the difference 'saved' at the end of the day. Harpster, how much did you get for your wife's Elantra after it was rear-ended? I'm guessing far less than you paid for it initially...I hope she's never in another accident again, but buying a leftover model is a bad idea for that reason and several others.