Car Chat General discussion about Lexus, other auto manufacturers and automotive news.

Edmunds Comparison: Rav4, CR-V, Rogue, Outlander

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-10-07, 08:43 PM
  #1  
GFerg
Speaks French in Russian

Thread Starter
 
GFerg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: What is G?
Posts: 13,250
Received 58 Likes on 45 Posts
Default Edmunds Comparison: Rav4, CR-V, Rogue, Outlander




The best thing about a compact-utility vehicle is, it doesn't smell like dirty diapers. A small crossover combines carlike size with trucklike utility, but it doesn't post a sign in the rear window that tells everyone you're a breeder in the making. Sure, it's a practical package for couples, but there's every chance that the cargo area contains a beach chair, a bicycle, a gym bag and a furniture box from Ikea.

By our count, there are already 17 compact vehicles in the class of crossover vehicles and more are on the way. It seems as if every manufacturer has taken to converting its small-car platforms to utility use, and the crossovers have been enthusiastically embraced. Honda put 170,028 CR-Vs on the ground in the U.S. in 2006, and Toyota nearly matched it with 152,047 RAV4s.

These small crossovers are evolving into niches just as distinct as you'll find in the car market. There are practical ones, sporting ones, tough ones and comfortable ones. We've brought together the 2007 Honda CR-V, 2007 Mitsubishi Outlander, 2008 Nissan Rogue and 2007 Toyota RAV4. All share a gestalt of efficiency and social responsibility, yet each has a unique set of qualities and options. We've designed this all-wheel-drive crossover comparison within a frame of affordable enthusiasm, kind of like "gimme all you got for under $30K." Each one delivers a different level of equipment and varying degrees of performance and utility.

4th Place (74.3 points) 2007 Mitsubishi Outlander XLS 4WD
As fate would have it, Edmunds actually owns a 2007 Mitsubishi Outlander XLS 4WD as part of our long-term test fleet. Its attractive base price of $25,635 quickly inflated to $30,615 with the three major options packages we elected: Luxury, Navigation, and Sun & Sound. You can hypothetically bypass the innovative 30-gigabyte hard drive-based navigation system (including a 6GB music server) to save $1,800 and squeeze the price under the $30K barrier for our test, but it's fair to note that the Honda CR-V still includes navigation for $220 less.

Every Outlander comes with a 220-horsepower 3.0-liter V6 engine mated to a six-speed automatic transmission, and this example has full-time all-wheel drive. The engine sings a sporty song, but it's far from a benchmark in terms of acceleration or fuel efficiency. The best sprint to 60 mph we can manage with this Outlander is 9.0 seconds, and we coaxed only 18 mpg from it over a 1,000-mile distance. These unexpectedly disappointing performances can be attributed to the Outlander V6's weight, a substantial 3,887 pounds that tops our fearsome foursome.

Plan on 5, Not 7
The standard 50/50-split third-row seats for the XLS represent a clever, space-efficient design, but they're so insubstantial in construction, so awkward in operation and so nearly unusable by humans that they might as well be replaced with aluminum-framed beach chairs from the top shelf at your local drug store (right next to the Styrofoam coolers).

But a quick drive in the Outlander V6 makes you forget all that. The transmission shift paddles mounted on the steering wheel of the XLS model enhance the Outlander's ability to engage a back road with the enthusiasm we expect from a true sport wagon. With its hefty steering effort, leather-wrapped steering wheel, supportive sports seats and adjustable all-wheel-drive system, the Outlander plays to its strengths on a twisting mountain pass, whether you have a pair of skis on the roof or a mountain bike.

The Enthusiast's Choice
Our group of test drivers — driving enthusiasts all — score the Mitsubishi Outlander highest in the categories of braking performance, handling and fun-to-drive, as well as exterior design. The Outlander also earns 2nd place when our editors are asked to select the vehicle they'd purchase if price were not considered. The Outlander XLS is clearly the enthusiast's choice, yet its compromises in comfort, everyday utility and fuel efficiency mean it places 4th in this crossover contest.

3rd Place (75.1 points) 2007 Honda CR-V EX-L Navi
Less than one point ahead of the Mitsubishi on the overall scorecard is the Honda CR-V. For $28,595, the 2007 Honda CR-V 4WD EX-L Navi is distinguished from lesser CR-V models by its all-wheel drive, leather seat upholstery, a DVD-based navigation system with voice recognition and rearview camera, and an upgraded audio system including MP3/aux jack and satellite radio.

There isn't a third-row seat or V6 available in the CR-V line, so the EX-L Navi can offer a lot of features without a noticeable price penalty. A high-revving, 166-hp 2.4-liter inline-4 is mated to a five-speed automatic, and acceleration is adequate but far from inspiring. The engine and transmission combination is perhaps our biggest gripe about the CR-V, and we didn't find the additional 10-hp increase over last year's CR-V's engine to make a difference.

Gear Hunter
We sometimes find the CR-V reluctant to hold a gear while climbing a hill and prone to cycling between ratios at inopportune moments, an indicator of a calibration for fuel efficiency at the expense of drivability. Until the CR-V acquires a torque-enhancing turbocharger for the engine or a "Sport" mode for the transmission shift schedule, the Honda's powertrain will never be far from your consciousness.

Because the CR-V's all-wheel-drive system is the least sophisticated of the bunch and its engine produces the least amount of torque, the CR-V is the only vehicle here that failed to negotiate the steep, slippery dirt trail that comprised our test of minimal off-road capability.

OK, so the CR-V is no off-roader. But what you might not suspect is that it did manage to post the fastest slalom speed in this group. Thanks to its short 103.1-inch wheelbase and relatively light 3,527-pound weight, the Honda responds quickly to its slightly overboosted steering. The flip side of these dimensional and directional assets is a freeway ride that feels a little choppier than the rest.

Industrial Design Award
Where the CR-V really shines is in the way it's designed. It's a tool that makes your life easy and pleasing, a perfect example of intelligent industrial design. Now in its third generation since its U.S. debut in 1997, the CR-V has steadily been improved, and we all feel its build quality deserves special recognition. In other words, Honda gets the stuff right when it comes to how and why a vehicle is screwed together. As a driving appliance (and we mean that as a compliment), the CR-V is as good as it gets in this group. You understand it intuitively, and the CR-V feels completely natural to drive.

2nd Place (76.4 points) 2008 Nissan Rogue SL AWD
It's often hard being the new guy, but the 2008 Nissan Rogue SL AWD manages to turn that awkward moment into an opportunity. The Rogue is based on the platform of the new, stretched Nissan Sentra, only it's better-looking, better riding and more useful. If you're looking for a compact crossover that drives most like a car, this is the one.

The Rogue is outfitted with a 170-hp 2.4-liter inline-4, and this torquey engine is matched with a continuously variable transmission (CVT). Both front- and all-wheel-drive versions are available.

Isolationist Theory
The Rogue's all-independent, long-travel suspension balances a supple ride with polished control. As a result, the Rogue is very stable at speed and confidently tracks a line, and the electric-assist power steering is exceptionally well tuned as well. On looks alone, we never would have guessed that the Rogue's 105.9-inch wheelbase (and 182.9-inch overall length) is the longest of this foursome, but this also plays a role in the Rogue's well-damped, big-car ride.

Its lengthy dimensions combined with a surprisingly light 3,544-pound weight also help explain the Rogue's excellent performance on the skid pad with a mark of 0.79g, but also contributes to its 61.5-mph run in the slalom, a last-place effort in which the Rogue feels a half-step behind driver inputs. Meanwhile, the Rogue stops shortest from 60 mph in a remarkable 123 feet.

The New Economy
The Rogue returns the best observed fuel economy of the test at over 22 mpg, with one tank returning 27 mpg. Frugal, but unfortunately not invigorating. Acceleration from a stop feels like it takes an eternity, even though the Nissan nearly caught the Mitsubishi with its 9.2-second sprint to 60 mph. The CVT feels like it has some components made from elastic, and it's not a feeling you can get away from, since the CVT and 170-hp 2.4-liter inline-4 is the only available powertrain.

We like the long-stroke engine with its balance shaft to reduce vibration, but would rather experience it firsthand than through the bland-o-nator CVT. This is just not the right technology for a small engine when more than a fuel-efficient commute is called for, and it's necessary to use the shift paddles to not only make back roads more interesting but also to soothe the ears.

Quality Where It Matters
The Rogue's interior is one of the vehicle's best qualities, and separates it from this budget-minded group. There's no glare-inducing touchscreen (nor even an available navigation system, by the way), the material colors are warmly tasteful and the well-organized presentation is superior. The six-way power seat that comes with the optional leather upholstery is deemed the best in this group. But if you want a third-row seat, you'll have to look elsewhere. Nissan's estimate of $28,500 (official pricing has not yet been announced) for all this factored heavily in its 2nd-place finish.

First Place (86.4 points) 2007 Toyota RAV4 Limited 4x4
Ever since Toyota introduced the RAV4 to the U.S. in 1996, it has been refining the hardware. It shows, because this 2007 RAV4 Limited 4WD waltzed through our various evaluations. Scanning the logbooks for something other than praise is like trying to drive two miles in Santa Monica without spotting a Starbucks.

Within this group of crossovers, the RAV4 is available in the widest array of prices and models, and this optioned-up RAV4 with all-wheel drive and a V6 comes to $29,374. We'd forgo the $700 third-row seat option to lower the price further; if you need seating for seven, get a Highlander.

How'd They Do That?
The RAV4's engine makes exactly 103 more horses than the CR-V. But adjusted for 2008 model-year EPA test methods (as each of the 2007 models has been for comparison purposes), the RAV4's V6 earns exactly the same EPA fuel-consumption estimates as the CR-V's inline-4, with a rating of 19 mpg city/26 mpg highway. Our real-world experience backs up these numbers, as the Honda's combined average computes to 20 mpg and compares to the Toyota's 19 mpg.

The RAV4's all-wheel-drive system switches unobtrusively between front- and all-wheel drive based on various conditions in order to maximize fuel economy or traction. The system can be locked into a split of 50 percent front/50 percent rear below 25 mph. The Nissan Rogue employs a similarly intelligent system, but it cannot be manipulated. The Mitsubishi AWD system is perhaps the most advanced, with three modes of driver-selectable operation, but no locking feature. ("4WD Lock" is actually a sportier, rear-biased AWD setting.)

Further enhancing the RAV4's off-road competence is an ABS-derived downhill assist (DAC) that maintains a snail's pace in 1st gear down steep inclines without driver intervention. The flip side to DAC is hill-start assist control (HAC), which keeps the vehicle stationary while starting on a steep or slippery surface. All this helps make the Toyota RAV4 the choice for hauling your gear into the forest.

Speed and Space
The Toyota's horsepower advantage played out decisively at the drag strip, outrunning the rest of the field to 60 mph by between 1.7 to 2.2 seconds. An aggressive (and undefeatable) electronic stability control system relegates the RAV4 to the back of the pack when it comes to delivering grip on the skid pad, but it proved largely permissive in the slalom test, allowing the RAV4 to make the second-fastest run overall at 62.5 mph.

Figuratively stretching a tape measure across all the interior dimensions of these crossovers shows them to be remarkably similar in size. The cargo bays also show remarkably similar volumes with the exception of the Rogue, which loses nearly 15 cubic feet to the competition because its second-row seat is more spacious, while a pop-up package organizer raises the height of the cargo floor. Meanwhile the RAV4's low 23-inch liftover height into the cargo area is friendly to your back, as is its rear hatch that swings open like a door.

The combination of subjective superiority, an overachieving 269-hp V6, impressive features and a competitive price adds up to a winner.

Conclusion
Look, people. Each of these sub-$30,000 crossovers is an outstanding do-it-all vehicle, as you can see from the narrow 2.1-point gap that separates 2nd from 4th place. Choose according to your tastes and needs, but do some homework first. If any of the following are deal breakers, don't choose the vehicle in parentheses: No navigation system offered (RAV4 and Rogue); no V6 offered (CR-V and Rogue); need to tow more than 1,500 pounds (CR-V and Rogue); no third-row seat available (CR-V and Rogue).

Mitsubishi usually packs more fun under the greenhouse than any other Japanese manufacturer, and the Outlander is no exception. We love the way it looks and the way it eagerly plays in the twisty bits, and we wish every vehicle had the Outlander's optional hard-drive music server that records and stores a stack of CDs. Just don't expect third-row passengers to be as enthusiastic about any of this as you might be.

If you're the type who doesn't like to take chances, the 2007 Honda CR-V will suit you just fine. It's the cleverest package, the choice for people who think. With its simplified model range and uncomplicated, undemanding personality, the CR-V is a cup of black coffee in a world where there are those who believe a half-caf, half-decaf, soy, latte macchiato over crushed ice almost sounds normal. The CR-V will get you to work and back. It'll do your errands on Saturday. But it doesn't like to get down and dirty.

The 2008 Nissan Rogue does what few all-new vehicles do well, especially in a mature market. Nissan has learned from the mistakes of others and offered an attractive, competitive package at a fair price. Our chief gripe lies with the CVT, a design that we know works well with a V6 in the Nissan Altima but proves distracting and disagreeable when matched with an inline-4. Still, there's a lot to like in the carlike Rogue and that's why it earned 2nd place.

Finally, if you ever find yourself saying, "Sure, I'll take the upgrade," then the 2007 Toyota RAV4 is the best choice for you. It's the benchmark in this segment. It makes a statement with power, but it backs up the message with fuel economy. It rides well, yet goes anywhere. And it combines utility and carlike comfort in a way that fits in your life in every way. The other guys are catching up, but for now, the Toyota RAV4 is still the one to beat.

GFerg is offline  
Old 09-10-07, 09:12 PM
  #2  
PhilipMSPT
Cycle Savant
iTrader: (5)
 
PhilipMSPT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: In rehab...
Posts: 21,527
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Yet the CRV now is the highest selling volume SUV on the road (if you even categorize it as an SUV)...
PhilipMSPT is offline  
Old 09-11-07, 06:01 AM
  #3  
spwolf
Lexus Champion
 
spwolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 19,845
Received 111 Likes on 82 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by PhilipMSPT
Yet the CRV now is the highest selling volume SUV on the road (if you even categorize it as an SUV)...
and? :-).

Best in US, Rav4 easily outsells it around the world...
spwolf is offline  
Old 09-11-07, 07:19 AM
  #4  
PhilipMSPT
Cycle Savant
iTrader: (5)
 
PhilipMSPT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: In rehab...
Posts: 21,527
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by spwolf
and? :-).

Best in US, Rav4 easily outsells it around the world...
True.

I'm actually a fan of the Rav4 for everyday functionality. The CRV is doing a great job with marketing to it's primary buyers (soccer moms and such...).
PhilipMSPT is offline  
Old 09-11-07, 07:32 AM
  #5  
gsrthomas
Lexus Champion
iTrader: (1)
 
gsrthomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Orange County, Ca
Posts: 1,947
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I'm actually glad Honda didnt put in a huge V6 in a small compact SUV. If I had to pick the Toyota I would choose the 4cly model.
gsrthomas is offline  
Old 09-11-07, 07:50 AM
  #6  
MPLexus301
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (3)
 
MPLexus301's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Friend Zone
Posts: 9,044
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

By the scoring, looks like the Rav4 really walked away with this comparo.

Congrats to Toyota.
MPLexus301 is offline  
Old 09-11-07, 08:10 AM
  #7  
LexFather
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Wow Rav4 destroyed them. Kudos to Nissan being 2nd with their new entry. CR-V beat the Outlander by 1 point. I would have let the Outlander win 3rd based on looks alone.
 
Old 09-11-07, 08:16 AM
  #8  
rosskoss
Advanced
 
rosskoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by gsrthomas
I'm actually glad Honda didnt put in a huge V6 in a small compact SUV. If I had to pick the Toyota I would choose the 4cly model.
Why? The Rav4 V6 gets the same mileage as the CR-V 4-banger. And I'd much rather have a powerful V6 than a lethargic 4 cylinder to weeze around in.
rosskoss is offline  
Old 09-11-07, 10:04 AM
  #9  
Plum
Rookie
 
Plum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: PA
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

A lot of people, me included, don't like the swing door of the RAV.
A hatch is much easier.
Plum is offline  
Old 09-11-07, 10:35 AM
  #10  
AzNMpower
Lead Lap
 
AzNMpower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

I'll take the Mitsubishi, simply because I emphasize driving dynamics over how practical the interior is (not that I would ever need space for 7 people). Plus, it looks great which is a bonus, and I really like that split tailgate. And did I mention that I care a lot about how much fun a car is?
AzNMpower is offline  
Old 09-11-07, 11:18 AM
  #11  
MR_F1
Lexus Champion
 
MR_F1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: NY
Posts: 3,370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Sure, cause driving dynamics is a number 1 priority for an suv
MR_F1 is offline  
Old 09-11-07, 11:18 AM
  #12  
XeroK00L
Lexus Fanatic
 
XeroK00L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: The Bay Area, CA, USA
Posts: 5,813
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Wow another big win by a huge margin. Well done Toyota!!!
XeroK00L is offline  
Old 09-11-07, 02:52 PM
  #13  
spwolf
Lexus Champion
 
spwolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 19,845
Received 111 Likes on 82 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by AzNMpower
I'll take the Mitsubishi, simply because I emphasize driving dynamics over how practical the interior is (not that I would ever need space for 7 people). Plus, it looks great which is a bonus, and I really like that split tailgate. And did I mention that I care a lot about how much fun a car is?
yeah, Mitsu is great... reason it didnt win is that Rav4 is also sporty SUV that handles great.... In compare of these same cars in Europe, Autobild also rated Rav4 the best, especially for having the best handling feel in the group.
spwolf is offline  
Old 09-11-07, 03:30 PM
  #14  
GStateOM
Lead Lap
 
GStateOM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: California
Posts: 650
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

My wife has a Rav4 with the V6. It's the ultimate sleeper. Small but pretty nimble for an SUV.

Although the quality isn't on par with Lexus, I can't really comment on much of it because I haven't checked out those other cars. I thought the interior was horrible, but I've gotten use to it quite a bit, so it's not quite as bad when you get used to it

I tried to get her to buy a CPO RX330, but she wouldn't budge.
GStateOM is offline  
Old 09-11-07, 07:05 PM
  #15  
AzNMpower
Lead Lap
 
AzNMpower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by MR_F1
Sure, cause driving dynamics is a number 1 priority for an suv
It's important to me. Of course, I would only buy a particular type of vehicle if I needed it. If I needed cargo capacity and the height of a SUV and wanted to spend $25k, the Mitsu would be my pick. Of course, if I don't need the height, I'll just get a sedan with fold down seats, or a sports wagon/hatchback.

That's like people who ask "If you buy a full-size luxury car, why do you expect it to handle like sports car?". My answer to that is, while I don't expect small car handling, I do expect it to drive well regardless of what kind if vehicle it is.

The RAV4 is just so bland-looking inside and out. I mean, it looks a lot like the old one, which didn't make any kind of statement. Plus, I don't need 268hp in a small SUV for the same reason I don't need 730hp in a Mercedes SL. It's too much.
AzNMpower is offline  


Quick Reply: Edmunds Comparison: Rav4, CR-V, Rogue, Outlander



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:08 AM.