Rankings of all tested small SUVs:
1. Forester
2. CRV
3. RAV4
4. Tucson
5. Escape Hybrid
6. Escape V6
7. Element
8. Xterra
9. Santa Fe
10. Outlander
11. Vue
12. Equinox
13. XL-7
14. Sorento
15. Freelander
16. Liberty V6
17. Liberty CDI
18. Aztek
19. Wrangler
Ratings of vehicles just tested:
CR-V EX:
Acceleration: 3/5 (0-60, 10.4)
Transmission: 5/5
Routine Handling: 4/5
Emergency Handling: 3/5
Braking: 4/5
Headlights: 3/5
Ride: 4/5
Noise: 3/5
Driving Position: 4/5
Front Seat: 4/5
Rear Seat: 4/5
Access: 4/5
Controls and Displays: 4/5
Fit and Finish: 4/5
Cargo area: 3/5
Fuel Economy: 3/5 (21 mpg)
Tucson GLS V6:
Acceleration: 3/5 (0-60, 10.1)
Transmission: 4/5
Routine Handling: 3/5
Emergency Handling: 3/5
Braking: 4/5
Headlights: 2/5
Ride: 4/5
Noise: 4/5
Driving Position: 4/5
Front Seat: 4/5
Rear Seat: 4/5
Access: 4/5
Controls and Displays: 5/5
Fit and Finish: 4/5
Cargo area: 3/5
Fuel Economy: 2/5 (18 mpg)
Escape Hybrid:
Acceleration: 3/5 (0-60, 10.7)
Transmission: 4/5
Routine Handling: 4/5
Emergency Handling: 3/5
Braking: 3/5
Headlights: 3/5
Ride: 3/5
Noise: 3/5
Driving Position: 4/5
Front Seat: 4/5
Rear Seat: 4/5
Access: 4/5
Controls and Displays: 4/5
Fit and Finish: 3/5
Cargo area: 3/5
Fuel Economy: 4/5 (26 mpg)
Xterra S:
Acceleration: 4/5 (0-60, 7.7)
Transmission: 5/5
Routine Handling: 3/5
Emergency Handling: 3/5
Braking: 4/5
Headlights: 3/5
Ride: 2/5
Noise: 4/5
Driving Position: 4/5
Front Seat: 4/5
Rear Seat: 4/5
Access: 3/5
Controls and Displays: 4/5
Fit and Finish: 4/5
Cargo area: 4/5
Fuel Economy: 1/5 (17 mpg)
Liberty CDI:
Acceleration: 2/5 (0-60, 12.4)
Transmission: 4/5
Routine Handling: 3/5
Emergency Handling: 2/5
Braking: 3/5
Headlights: 3/5
Ride: 3/5
Noise: 2/5
Driving Position: 4/5
Front Seat: 4/5
Rear Seat: 3/5
Access: 3/5
Controls and Displays: 4/5
Fit and Finish: 3/5
Cargo area: 3/5
Fuel Economy: 2/5 (18 mpg)
Wrangler Unlimited:
Acceleration: 3/5 (0-60, 10.3)
Transmission: 3/5
Routine Handling: 2/5
Emergency Handling: 2/5
Braking: 2/5
Headlights: 3/5
Ride: 2/5
Noise: 2/5
Driving Position: 2/5
Front Seat: 3/5
Rear Seat: 2/5
Access: 2/5
Controls and Displays: 3/5
Fit and Finish: 2/5
Cargo area: 3/5
Fuel Economy: 1/5 (14 mpg)
I was kinda surprised how poorly the Jeep Liberty CDI rated.
"Engine sounds like a farm tractor"
Overall performance was pitiful, especially towing. What's the point of picking this over a much cheaper and better performing Xterra?
If one doesn't tow or go off road, it seems one would be far better off with a CR-V.
Forester, CR-V, and RAV-4, my 3 favorite came in the top 3. :praise:
QuoteForester, CR-V, and RAV-4, my 3 favorite came in the top 3. :praise:
Your favorites, all FWD. <_<
QuoteQuoteForester, CR-V, and RAV-4, my 3 favorite came in the top 3. :praise:
Your favorites, all FWD. <_<
the Forester is rear biased, and the others have 4wd, just fwd based. :rolleyes:
QuoteQuoteQuoteForester, CR-V, and RAV-4, my 3 favorite came in the top 3. :praise:
Your favorites, all FWD. <_<
the Forester is rear biased, and the others have 4wd, just fwd based. :rolleyes:
The CRV, for example, runs in FWD unless additional traction is needed. That's basically FWD (a setup you don't understand the merits and demerits of anyway).
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteForester, CR-V, and RAV-4, my 3 favorite came in the top 3. :praise:
Your favorites, all FWD. <_<
the Forester is rear biased, and the others have 4wd, just fwd based. :rolleyes:
The CRV, for example, runs in FWD unless additional traction is needed. That's basically FWD (a setup you don't understand the merits and demerits of anyway).
i understand the merits and demerits of FWD, i just refuse to reason with them. :lol:
Geez, I didn't know the old AMC 4.0 was THAT awful on gas mileage.
QuoteGeez, I didn't know the old AMC 4.0 was THAT awful on gas mileage.
It really isn't, those CR guys just push their vehicles hard ;). Actually, apparantly it is, it is rated 14/18. Of course, the CDI is rated 21/26 and they didn't get even close to that.
CR's overall mileage is typically similar to EPA city mileage, with a few exceptions (most typically with more fuel-efficient cars, but there are examples in all types).
QuoteGeez, I didn't know the old AMC 4.0 was THAT awful on gas mileage.
Gearing and aerodynamics has more to do with it than design. :)
QuoteQuoteGeez, I didn't know the old AMC 4.0 was THAT awful on gas mileage.
Gearing and aerodynamics has more to do with it than design. :)
What's the mileage of an 00 Cherokee with the 4.0?
There's a few oranges thrown in with the apples.
QuoteQuoteQuoteGeez, I didn't know the old AMC 4.0 was THAT awful on gas mileage.
Gearing and aerodynamics has more to do with it than design. :)
What's the mileage of an 00 Cherokee with the 4.0?
Can't remember off the top of my head. Better than 14/18, that's for damned sure. My '93 was something like 16/24.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteGeez, I didn't know the old AMC 4.0 was THAT awful on gas mileage.
Gearing and aerodynamics has more to do with it than design. :)
What's the mileage of an 00 Cherokee with the 4.0?
Can't remember off the top of my head. Better than 14/18, that's for damned sure. My '93 was something like 16/24.
Looked it up. 16/20 for a 4.0 Cherokee 4WD automatic, which is better but still not great for a fairly small SUV.
Of course. It's terrible. Like I said: gearing and aerodynamics.
Cherokee had exactly the same gearing, and only slightly better aerodynamics, hence the fuel economy is only slightly better.