Edmunds' Compact Crossover Comparo: Toyota RAV4 vs Nissan Rogue vs Honda CR-V vs Mitsubishi Outlander

this test really shows how strong competition is in this segment, look how close those finishes are in points

— bmwdrvr (View Profile)

Posted on 9/11/2007 3:13:55 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

"The Rogue is just cheap, cheap to the touch cheap to look at."

And not only have you seen it in person already, but been in it and driven it! Wow, I'm impressed! You must go to many events that we couldn't even dream of!

"The best here should be the Mitsubishi."

No, although I'm rooting for Mitsu, the Outlander is unimpressive. The V6 isn't especially impressive, everyone in this class has available AWD, the ride probably isn't that smooth, the interior is still cheap and if you think a crappy trunk-mounted subwoofer is a "convenient touch" then so be it. I find it about as appealing as gimmicky Chrysler features like the glovebox cooler and flip-down trunk speakers.

— S4cabriofoxone (View Profile)

Posted on 9/11/2007 6:27:49 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

RICEMASTER, the only rice burner I've ever owned was a new 2001 RAV4 which I bought for my wife as she likes small SUVs. About 2 years later we gave it to one of our daughters to make up for buying the other daughter a new small Saturn. My wife and I were left with a leased Grand Marquis replaced later by a leased A6 Quattro.

As you can see, my biases are definitely toward large RWD sedans and Sporty AWD sedans. As for the 4-cylinder noise factor on the RAV, it is only an issue above 60 m.p.h. The lack of front passenger seat height adjustment is something I'll never forgive Toyota for. Worse than that, the sun roof was made of plastic rather than glass which will surely eventually discolor in the sun. We had the Limited model with the big plastic cover on the rear-door-mounted spare wheel. We never backed into anything but it would have cost $1,400 to replace that plastic wheel cover. Other tha that, the RAV was a great car and my daughter loved it.

— EnnNorak (View Profile)

Posted on 9/12/2007 2:11:56 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1   

"The roques interior looked even worse than the altima. You don't have to be visually impaired to tell the difference."

If you read the article, you'd notice that the Rogue's interior was actually rated highest in quality and design. It just doesn't photograph well.

"On the other hand, I forgot to mention the Mitsu V6 is pretty lazy and has an annoying lag to it, it's not very responsive. But compare to the 4cyls, it's much much more refine, smoother and makes much better and less buzzy noises."

And the Toyota six is more powerful and more refined again! So why not? What do you have against the RAV4? It's much-improved from the last generation.

BTW, even if the Altima's interior LOOKS cheap, it doesn't mean it is cheap. Have you driven the new one, or were you talking about the old one? Because the new one's interior is definitely up to class standards.

— S4cabriofoxone (View Profile)

Posted on 9/11/2007 11:20:10 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

I agree; the RAV4 would be my pick of the six-cylinder cute 'utes. I still prefer the CR-V's styling (more flair) and interior, though. It's just not powerful enough.

You're looking at the FX? How about checking out the X6? It looks very impressive.

— S4cabriofoxone (View Profile)

Posted on 9/11/2007 11:21:48 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

If its anything like the X5's interior (should be), then it wont disappoint.

— M53R (View Profile)

Posted on 9/12/2007 10:51:56 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0