Consumer Guide review: 06 Grand Vitara

[TBR]

This vehicle probably has a better powertrain than its competitors do, very nice :)

[ifcar]

Why do you say that? I believe it's the same engine as the current XL-7, which is nothing special at all.  

[TBR]

Mainly because of the manual transmission. But, I thought the 2.7l was extremely smooth? And, look what its competition has! There is nothing special about the I4s of the Rav4 and CR-V or even the V6 of the Escape.

[ifcar]

Especially smooth? It's not standing out in my mind, but maybe.

In the XL-7, it was underpowered and rather noisy, but that could be attributed to that car's extra weight. But aside from the manual option, I doubt this engine will prove much better than such V6s as the Santa Fe/Tucson/Sportage 2.7, Liberty 3.7, or the RAV 2.4, which I do not hold in high regard. The CR-V 2.4 is a very nice engine, and I do like the Escape 3.0 and 2.3, Santa Fe/Sorento 3.5, even the Equinox/Torrent 3.4. And of course there's the 06 RAV's 3.5.  

[Raghavan]

Especially smooth? It's not standing out in my mind, but maybe.

In the XL-7, it was underpowered and rather noisy, but that could be attributed to that car's extra weight. But aside from the manual option, I doubt this engine will prove much better than such V6s as the Santa Fe/Tucson/Sportage 2.7, Liberty 3.7, or the RAV 2.4, which I do not hold in high regard. The CR-V 2.4 is a very nice engine, and I do like the Escape 3.0 and 2.3, Santa Fe/Sorento 3.5, even the Equinox/Torrent 3.4. And of course there's the 06 RAV's 3.5.

Besides the upcoming Rav4's 3.5, i don't see a nicer engine than this.
And besides, this thing is REAR drive, bitches.  

[ifcar]

What's nice about this engine? Low power, rather low displacement.

[TBR]

Only the Escape/Tribute and Forester XT have more power without having much, much more weight as well.

[Raghavan]

What's nice about this engine? Low power, rather low displacement.

But it's better than all the competitors except the new rav's engine and the forester XT.

[mazda6er]

What's nice about this engine? Low power, rather low displacement.

Small utes with equal or lesser displacement AND equal or lesser hp:

BMW X3 (base)
Honda Element
Honda CRV
Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute/Mercury Mariner (base)
Hyundai Santa Fe (base)
Hyundai Tuscon (base)
Jeep Liberty (base)
Jeep Wrangler (base)
Land Rover Freelander
Mitsubishi Outlander
Saturn Vue (base)
Subaru Forester (base)
Toyota RAV4

Granted many of those have more powerful engine options, but they all start with less power.

[Raghavan]

What's nice about this engine? Low power, rather low displacement.

Small utes with equal or lesser displacement AND equal or lesser hp:

BMW X3 (base)
Honda Element
Honda CRV
Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute/Mercury Mariner (base)
Hyundai Santa Fe (base)
Hyundai Tuscon (base)
Jeep Liberty (base)
Jeep Wrangler (base)
Land Rover Freelander
Mitsubishi Outlander
Saturn Vue (base)
Subaru Forester (base)
Toyota RAV4

Granted many of those have more powerful engine options, but they all start with less power.

the X3 2.5 is dead.  

[mazda6er]

Whose side are you on?! :angry:

Yeah, you're right.

[Raghavan]

Whose side are you on?! :angry:

Yeah, you're right.

Yours.
Sides, the X3 costs about $12 grand more, so that's out of the question.  

[mazda6er]

Whose side are you on?! :angry:

Yeah, you're right.

Yours.
Sides, the X3 costs about $12 grand more, so that's out of the question.

Out of the question for what?

If the lower engine option still existed on the BMW, it would only serve to further our point.... <_<  It can only help to argue that an SUV from a luxury marque that is significantly more expensive than the Suzuki has less power than it. Unfortunately that's no longer an option.

[Raghavan]

Whose side are you on?! :angry:

Yeah, you're right.

Yours.
Sides, the X3 costs about $12 grand more, so that's out of the question.

Out of the question for what?

If the lower engine option still existed on the BMW, it would only serve to further our point.... <_<  It can only help to argue that an SUV from a luxury marque that is significantly more expensive than the Suzuki has less power than it. Unfortunately that's no longer an option.

I thought we were talking about SUV's that were small and cheap too.

[ifcar]

Only the Escape/Tribute and Forester XT have more power without having much, much more weight as well.

HP/L is your criteria for what makes a good engine? Ricer.  :P  

[ifcar]

What's nice about this engine? Low power, rather low displacement.

But it's better than all the competitors except the new rav's engine and the forester XT.

Based on...

[TBR]

Only the Escape/Tribute and Forester XT have more power without having much, much more weight as well.

HP/L is your criteria for what makes a good engine? Ricer.  :P

Who said anything about hp/liter? It is a simple fact that only a handful of the Grand Vitara's competitors have more power.

[mazda6er]

What's nice about this engine? Low power, rather low displacement.

Small utes with equal or lesser displacement AND equal or lesser hp:

BMW X3 (base - used to)
Honda Element
Honda CRV
Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute/Mercury Mariner (base)
Hyundai Santa Fe (base)
Hyundai Tuscon (base)
Jeep Liberty (base)
Jeep Wrangler (base)
Land Rover Freelander
Mitsubishi Outlander
Saturn Vue (base)
Subaru Forester (base)
Toyota RAV4

Granted many of those have more powerful engine options, but they all start with less power.

...

[ifcar]

What's nice about this engine? Low power, rather low displacement.

Small utes with equal or lesser displacement AND equal or lesser hp:

BMW X3 (base)
Honda Element
Honda CRV
Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute/Mercury Mariner (base)
Hyundai Santa Fe (base)
Hyundai Tuscon (base)
Jeep Liberty (base)
Jeep Wrangler (base)
Land Rover Freelander
Mitsubishi Outlander
Saturn Vue (base)
Subaru Forester (base)
Toyota RAV4

Granted many of those have more powerful engine options, but they all start with less power.

And all but two are four-cylinders.

Being standard doesn't make it a better engine.

[mazda6er]

What's nice about this engine? Low power, rather low displacement.

Small utes with equal or lesser displacement AND equal or lesser hp:

BMW X3 (base)
Honda Element
Honda CRV
Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute/Mercury Mariner (base)
Hyundai Santa Fe (base)
Hyundai Tuscon (base)
Jeep Liberty (base)
Jeep Wrangler (base)
Land Rover Freelander
Mitsubishi Outlander
Saturn Vue (base)
Subaru Forester (base)
Toyota RAV4

Granted many of those have more powerful engine options, but they all start with less power.

And all but two are four-cylinders.

Being standard doesn't make it a better engine.

It does, however make the Suzuki more powerful than all of the vehicles I listed, base vs. base. If you'll notice, 5 of them do not have better engine options, so the Suzuki is more powerful than any trim of those vehicles.

[ifcar]

Only the Escape/Tribute and Forester XT have more power without having much, much more weight as well.

HP/L is your criteria for what makes a good engine? Ricer.  :P

Who said anything about hp/liter? It is a simple fact that only a handful of the Grand Vitara's competitors have more power.

Wasn't reading carefully, too many things going on. Looking at hp vs. weight:

Grand Vitara: 185, 3582
Santa Fe: 200, 3752
Liberty: 210, 3851
Vue: 250, 3630
RAV4 (06): 268 (weight unknown, but unlikely to be much more than the GV, current version only weighs 3119)


Furthermore, having more power than 4-cylinder competitors doesn't make it a good engine. A Chrysler Sebring 2.7 has more hp than an Accord 2.4, does that make the Sebring's a better engine?

[ifcar]

What's nice about this engine? Low power, rather low displacement.

Small utes with equal or lesser displacement AND equal or lesser hp:

BMW X3 (base)
Honda Element
Honda CRV
Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute/Mercury Mariner (base)
Hyundai Santa Fe (base)
Hyundai Tuscon (base)
Jeep Liberty (base)
Jeep Wrangler (base)
Land Rover Freelander
Mitsubishi Outlander
Saturn Vue (base)
Subaru Forester (base)
Toyota RAV4

Granted many of those have more powerful engine options, but they all start with less power.

And all but two are four-cylinders.

Being standard doesn't make it a better engine.

It does, however make the Suzuki more powerful than all of the vehicles I listed, base vs. base. If you'll notice, 5 of them do not have better engine options, so the Suzuki is more powerful than any trim of those vehicles.

Irrelevent. I'm talking about the engine, not the car. Making a mediocre engine standard doesn't make it a better engine.

[mazda6er]

Irrelevent. I'm talking about the engine, not the car. Making a mediocre engine standard doesn't make it a better engine.

And what am I talking about, lollipops and unicorns? I'm not suggesting the engine is "better" because it's standard, I'm saying the engine is more powerful, because it IS.

I believe this was your comment, which started the debate:

What's nice about this engine? Low power, rather low displacement.

That, to me, would suggest that you find the engine to be lacking in both the hp and displacement departments.

Well answer this question: Of those 13 SUVs I listed, which one has either more displacement or more hp than the Vitara?

[ifcar]

Irrelevent. I'm talking about the engine, not the car. Making a mediocre engine standard doesn't make it a better engine.

And what am I talking about, lollipops and unicorns? I'm not suggesting the engine is "better" because it's standard, I'm saying the engine is more powerful, because it IS.

I believe this was your comment, which started the debate:

What's nice about this engine? Low power, rather low displacement.

That, to me, would suggest that you find the engine to be lacking in both the hp and displacement departments.

Well answer this question: Of those 13 SUVs I listed, which one has either more displacement or more hp than the Vitara?

My comment was in response to "Besides the upcoming Rav4's 3.5, i don't see a nicer engine than this."

There isn't really anything especially nice about this engine. It doesn't have much power except compared to a group of 4-cylinders that you brought up (most of which have higher end engine options). I didn't bother to bring up this engine's lack of refinement in the XL-7, it didn't seem relevent to the sort of concerns that the member whom I just quoted (Rag) would have about an engine.

So what is especially nice about this engine? All you've said is that it is standard equipment, and has more power than the standard engines on a number of other small SUVs. I'm talking only about the engine.  

[Raghavan]

What's nice about this engine? Low power, rather low displacement.

But it's better than all the competitors except the new rav's engine and the forester XT.

Based on...

performance...

[mazda6er]

Irrelevent. I'm talking about the engine, not the car. Making a mediocre engine standard doesn't make it a better engine.

And what am I talking about, lollipops and unicorns? I'm not suggesting the engine is "better" because it's standard, I'm saying the engine is more powerful, because it IS.

I believe this was your comment, which started the debate:

What's nice about this engine? Low power, rather low displacement.

That, to me, would suggest that you find the engine to be lacking in both the hp and displacement departments.

Well answer this question: Of those 13 SUVs I listed, which one has either more displacement or more hp than the Vitara?

My comment was in response to "Besides the upcoming Rav4's 3.5, i don't see a nicer engine than this."

There isn't really anything especially nice about this engine. It doesn't have much power except compared to a group of 4-cylinders that you brought up (most of which have higher end engine options). I didn't bother to bring up this engine's lack of refinement in the XL-7, it didn't seem relevent to the sort of concerns that the member whom I just quoted (Rag) would have about an engine.

So what is especially nice about this engine? All you've said is that it is standard equipment, and has more power than the standard engines on a number of other small SUVs. I'm talking only about the engine.

Alright if, let's get this straight. I...am...also...only...talking...about...the...engine. Slow enough for you? Let's for a moment, for the sake of your comprehension, pretend that the cars themselves do not exist. Let's line up the 14 engines on the ground by themselves. I'm not talking what is standard and what is not, I'm not talking refinement or anything else. Just answer the following question: Which one has the most hp and the largest displacement?

Your next post should contain only two words:

<insert model name here>

hint: it should say "Grand Vitara"

[ifcar]

The Grand Vitara V6 has more hp and displacement than the 4-cylinder models that you listed.

What's your point? Does that make it a good engine?

[ifcar]

What's nice about this engine? Low power, rather low displacement.

But it's better than all the competitors except the new rav's engine and the forester XT.

Based on...

performance...

How do you figure? Consumer Guide estimated a 0-60 in the 9s, many competing models beat that.  

[mazda6er]

The Grand Vitara V6 has more hp and displacement than the 4-cylinder models that you listed.

What's your point? Does that make it a good engine?

Whether or not it was a good engine wasn't the question. You brought up a lack of power and a small displacement. I listed 13 models that it beats in those areas. It's okay to admit you weren't very right if (it's really about time you were even slightly incorrect once). I'm wrong all the time. Alright, enough arguing for one day. I should really be doing more homework.   :)

[ifcar]

For almost any engine, especially a V6 or above, you can find lots of cars with less power. Doesn't mean it's a good engine though. Take this example:

The Dodge Stratus 2.7-liter V6 has 200 horsepower. That's more hp and displacement than any number of other midsize 4-cylinder sedans. Does that make it a good engine?