Which of these three small SUVs would you pick?
 

My wife and I are considering a small SUV to replace my Jetta TDI. There about a 50/50 chance of doing this and it would be no sooner than six months from now.

We're looking for something that is fun to drive, has decent power and torque, has four wheel drive on demand (or full-time), is dependable, has good storage space, and has decent gas mileage.

I've narrowed it down to three choices with approx prices in our area:

1. 2011 Toyota RAV4 4x4, 3.5L V6, RAV4, 5-Speed Automatic $27,500

2. 2011 Mitsubishi Outlander GT S-AWC V6 $30,200

3. 2011 Subaru 2.5 XT Premium $27,000 (though the price would likely be a bit higher because I'd want a sunroof.)

Do you really need a SUV? Think about it; you will hate driving one of those things if you are used to driving real cars.

Over here, the most popular in terms of SUV's are as follows:Honda, Mitsubishi, Toyota, Subaru

I truly had no idea these were so expensive. I mean they are pretty expensive for what they are.

How much are you getting for the TDI?

I did a quick NADA lookup for the TDI and it gave me an approx value of $12,000. It's in great shape, so I could probably get a bit more.

Because they are very popular with the soccer mom crowd.

How about a Toyota Tacoma Access Cab? I'ts tough, well finished, and has room inside the back for an extra rider or to store your stuff.

Yeah, that is a concern. I do love the drive of German cars!! That's the appeal of the Mitsubishi, because it seems to be marketed towards drivers. But as a homeowner, we're always looking for space to throw items from Home Depot and such into the back of the Jetta and finding ourselves a little short on storage space.

But the biggest reason is the snowstorms that we're getting here in the NE. The four wheel drive would be a big help.

This being a Mercedes forum.....I would say to hold off until the GLK250 CDI comes out later this year.

http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/featured-cars/288661-report-mercedes-benz-glk-diesel-way.html
http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/featured-cars/292831-report-mercedes-benz-c-class-diesel-coming-2012-a.html


(Whether or not they sell a stripped down version to keep the prices in the low 30s has yet to be seen)

I owned a jeep for a while because I thought I needed it, I hated driving it the entire time I owned it. Do the math and figure out how many times you can have your stuff delivered from home depot (an or rent a truck) for the cost of one of these things.

I hate to break this to you, but VA isn't in the northeast. I probably get five time as much snow as you do, and I certainly don't need a SUV. My 4matic works just fine in anything short of a real blizzard (when you should stay home anyway).

Personally, I will never buy another new vehicle. The initial depreciation is ridiculous on these types of vehicles. If you must buy one, look for a late model used one for half the price.

I would say Toyota, as the 3.5 gives you good power without having to deal with a turbo (Subaru).

I can't imaging spending more than $30,000 or so on a new car, so MB is out of the equation. But a decent wagon with 4WD would be a good option.

I agree that you've got a lot more snow out there in CO. The biggest thing we deal with here in the "southern" NE is fact that it doesn't get cleared as quickly. Then there's the other drivers.

I remember my E-320 with a good set of snow tires was like driving a tank in the snow!!

Can you send my about $15,000 to cover the difference between our price-point and the MB? :D

OK, if not a SUV, which 4WD Wagon under $32,000 would you recommend?
 

If it's not a SUV that we should get, which of the 4WD wagons would you recommend? I've always loved wagons, they have more storage space than sedans, and they're still fun to drive!

Interesting review of the Cayenne by Warren Brown in Sundays Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/04/AR2011020402462.html

Actually it's only $5,000 more then the Mitsubishi IF you can find a basic one.

I'm very curious to see what the pricing on the 250 is going to be like.

AWD in VA?

How about the Acura TSX wagon?

http://www.acura.com/modellanding.aspx?model=tsx%20sport%20wagon

Which Subaru? Outback or Forester?

Do you have reason to believe that you would be unhappy with the performance of a normally-aspirated 4-cylinder Subaru?

Find a good used E320 4matic for $20-25k. It will hold it's value much longer than any new SUV, it will carry stuff, and it will be much nicer to drive.

By only looking at new cars in that price range, you are severely limiting your options.

I looked at all of those and more. The Chevy Equinox blew them all away. Motor Week just did a comparison of 9 small SUV below 29K and also picked the Equinox.

I love the Post, but have never liked Warren Brown's columns. For one thing, he seems to always start with what he doesn't like about the car being reviewed. For some cars, a negative approach is appropriate, but he seems to start with the negative in every case. His review of the Cayenne is a good example. He starts the column noting that his test car did not have a backup camera. Is that the sort of feature that he expects to be of interest in a review of a Porsche?

On the other hand, I completely agree with his view that it is hard to justify paying $93,000 for that car. It does seem like a particularly pointless vehicle.

I've thought about that, but have learned all too well the old adage: "There's nothing more expensive than a cheap Mercedes." Also, premium fuel cost and mileage are a big factor.

GM??? Maybe I'm too biased.

I am a diehard Ford guy, it was that good

also MW review

http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt3022a.shtml

I'm thinking the Forester, but the Outback is nice too. I also want the performance help of the turbo.

I owned a Ford once. '83 Ford Escort. It died at 86,000 miles. 'Course that was during the horrible '80's when everything coming out of the States was garbage.

none of the cars are the same as the 80's. I had a camaro that swore me off GM and a Toyota I bought new that rusted out from under me. All the car co's have figured out the quality needs so the playing field leveled off years ago for me.

The 2.5 Outback has a CVT transmission and is pretty smooth. The 2.5 Forester has a conventional automatic that does the old 4 cyl/auto upshift/downshift shuffle. It's a pain.

If premium fuel is an issue, you better review the octane needs of the cars in question. I would be very surprised if the XT turbo is designed to sip 87.

You're right. It needs premium.

I'm beginning to feel like I want the best of too many worlds.....

What about the RAV-4 V6?

You have a number of different criteria - e.g., fuel economy, fuel grade, engine performance, drivetrain layout, general utility - that are going to bump into each other.

I wish you success in finding a compromise that works well for you.

After my wife's daily driver was totaled in August, we went to a Subaru dealership expecting to purchase a new Forester, and ended up buying a Subaru Certified 2007 (previous generation) Outback. Liked the Forester; liked the Outback much better. The performance of the normally aspirated 4-cylinder engine suits our needs and personal tastes.

I like the idea of the CVT, and I hope that it turns out to be a real winner for long-term reliability. I didn't feel comfortable buying one at this time.

87 octane, from what I've found in a quick google search.

Do you need 4 seats?

You're very correct there!! I need to rethink what I'm really looking for. I agree that it's easy to haul the twice a year big stuff from Home Depot or our local nursery with a rental for the day, which I've done in the past. When I really think about it, we really only have a need for the space of a SUV a few days a year, so the practicality of buying one doesn't seem to outweigh the desire for something that drives more like a car.

So if it's the availability of 4WD with the feel of a car and a little more space for storage, then a wagon is the way to go.

I like the fact that the Subaru uses a boxer type engine with lower center of gravity. The engine is inherently smoother running, which translates into a more comfortable car and longer lasting engine. Time for a test drive?

I'd keep the TDI and invest in a spare set of steel wheels with snow tires. My A3 Jetta does better in the snow with dedicated snow tires than just about anything I have driven; it's pretty hard to get it stuck.

I also think you'll miss the character of the TDI (if it's anything like my '98, anyway) and I KNOW you'll miss the mpg's. I love filling up, going to my little spiral notebook to record the date and mileage, and discovering it's been 5 weeks since my last fill-up.

Keep in mind that AWD has lots more expensive parts to break. If your TDI isn't a lemon, I'd be hard-pressed to part with it (if I were you). I keep thinking about that with mine; why would I ever part with a car that, with snows, does EVERYTHING I need it to do year round, and returns 45mpg in the process? Plus, I enjoy the hell out of driving it. Nothing else does so many things so well. That said, I have more than one car, and the others do some things (hauling, spirited driving) better, just not as many things well. And none of them come close on mileage/ease of maintenance!

BTW, have you tried any of the mods available for your TDI? I am familiar mostly with the options for A3 chassis and AHU motor TDIs, but I am sure some most exist for your car. While it'll never be a race car, I was VERY pleasantly surprised at what a simple chip upgrade and spring set did for my car.

For less than the down payment for a new car, you could probably kit your car out with snows and some nice mods. Something to think about!

:cool:None of the above.

I'd buy a new GL Mercedes SUV diesel.

I have not kept up to date on late model Subarus, but I loved my wife's 1997 Impreza. One thing I liked about it was that it achieved its performance goals through sound mechanical design rather than through more the more exotic systems used on its direct competitor, the Mitsubishi Evo. The Evo achieved its magic (and I hear that is an apt description) through a sophisticated electronically-controlled AWD system. The Impreza did its AWD with the equivalent of a limited-slip differential that split power between the front and rear wheels. Simple. In addition, the horizontally opposed motor gave the car a lower center of gravity and the car itself is rigid and strong. Where other cars have a hatch connecting the rear seating area to the trunk, the Impreza has a solid bulkhead, which greatly stiffens the suspension points. All very simple and fundamentally correct.

Our Impreza had a suspension kit which greatly improved the handling for spirited driving, but the handling tended to break down if you really pushed it near the limit. There is only so much one can do with McPherson struts. That was not an issue for me because I don't drive near the limit like I did back in the day.

I would also note that the horizontally opposed motor was smooth, but no smoother than our current Honda Accord. I miss the Impreza.

Anything Subaru is good, unless you really need the space I wouldn't get an SUV.

You can buy base Rav4's for low 20's and they are good little trucks, mileage is good as well.

Considering for 20 bucks you can rent the Lowes truck for the couple times of year you need it why bother spending a ton of money on one of your own? Keep a car and beat up their truck!

I bought my 08 Outback b/c I wanted a reliable AWD with some cargo space, and that's just what i got. It's been completely trouble free so far (not much to break, it's pretty simple by today's standards). The normally aspirated 2.5 gets the job done but there are times when I could've used more, but with reliability being one of my major goals i didn't want the added complexity/stress of the turbo.

I'm going to give them another couple years to thoroughly sort out the new CVT, then I might be back for another Outback. Already bought my wife the Forrester, she loves it. The 210 is still the highway cruise of choice but it's a garage queen during the CT winter salt season. Especially this one.

We were looking at the Subaru Forester MY 2011 because they had some upgrades over the previous generation and had a timing chain instead of a belt, among other things.

The Outback seems to be a nice option too.

Did I read it right that the Forester requires Premium fuel? :eek:

Ours takes 87.

My mom is facing a similar decision so I've been helping her test drive a few of them and Forrester (non-turbo) was one of them. I liked it very much. I drove several SUVs that day (incl. Honda CR-V 4 cyl, RAV-4 4cyl, Nissan Tiguan) and that Forrester was the quickest one in the bunch. It has a reputation of a good solid 4x4 system. I think the turbo version would be a blast. That evening my sister purchased Consumer Reports which rated Subaru Forrester as their top pick.

I think my mom will choose the RAV-4 (slightly used) because of the sticker shock price for these. With Honda CR-V in close second.

Good luck with your decision - with so many options decisions are tough these days... :)

The Forester turbo.

Yes, I love my TDI. I love the way it handles like a German car, the torque, and the fact that it's a little "different" because it's a diesel. I already have a completely different set of wheels and tires that I use for winter. The original all-seasons will have to be replaced for next season and I could put actual snow tires on them. The only thing I don't like about driving on snow tires is that you can't drive over 50mph without heating them up too much.

Maybe it'll make more sense to sell my wife's Toyota instead. 'Course that means she'd be the one with the new car!!

My TDI has been well maintained and is in excellent condition. On top of that, I had to pay a $3,000 premium when I bought it because it's a TDI. It is now in the "sweet spot" of being both paid for and already paying for that $3,000 in fuel savings. It wouldn't make a lot of sense to get rid of it now.

BUT diesel fuel in my area is about $3.50/gallon now and I expect it to keep rising. I wonder if it really saves money to pay more at the pump even though I'm not filling up as often. I drive about 21,000 miles a year.

I looked at the math not long ago, and I feel it's still justified. Figure 500 miles at 25mpg of gas = 20 gallons used. At $3/gal that's $60. That same 500 miles at 45mpg would use 11.11 gal of diesel. At $3.5/gal, that's still only $39 for the same distance traveled.

The Scooby-Doo.

Ah I see. Those are in demand!

Any idea if th Subaru Forester diesel will be released here?