Automotive Forums

Ok so here's the deal.  I'm having a very hard time finding an SUV which matches my needs.  Price isn't TOO much of an issue as my Father-in-law is fronting us the cash so we don't have any interest to deal with.  He also has a friend in the used car business who is taking us all up to a huge dealer-only auction next week.  So, hopefully we'll be able to find a good used vehicle for several thousand under normal used prices.  I'm not talking a Lexus or anything but a Honda Pilot or something could be do-able if the deal's good enough.

Anyway, here's what I'll be using the vehicle for.  Like most SUV owners, most of the time will be spent on the pavement so semi decent (or at least average) mpg is a must.  Also no sketchy stuff like requiring premium gas (ahem, here's looking at you FJ Cruiser)...  We also have no truck, so we need decent cargo room for transporting yard/landscaping stuff and the like.

While most time will be spent on the road we WILL be doing some off-roading int he form of a beach.  There is a public 4wheel beach near where I live and having access to it is a must.  We also have two dogs and plan on kids in the next couple years...so no fabric that is prone to visible stains.

I was seriously considering the FJ Cruiser until I read that it required premium gas.  I was also thinking about the newer Rav4, however it's off-roading is questionable.  The Highlander isn't bad, but it looks so bleh.  Xterra isn't bad either but it gets terrible gas mileage...  Grrr...HELP!  

Funny you should mention that you were considering the FJ Cruiser because, given your criteria, that seems to be among the worst options.  Big on the outside, cramped on the inside, terrible access to the rear seats, and poor gas mileage, premium fuel or not.  

But anyway, please consider the fact that pretty much anything with AWD/4WD will do the job you require.  Unless the beach you visit has unusually deep sand or impossibly steep dunes, no AWD car or truck should have a problem.

But just in case off-road/low traction ability is a concern (which it doesn't seem to be), consider the two different types of AWD systems used in most "softroad" SUVs:

SUVs like the RAV4 and Honda CRV use a part time AWD system that drives only the front wheels in normal conditions.  When the system detects wheel slippage, it instantly transfers power to the rear wheels, and provides AWD capability until it is nolonger needed.  The benefit if this type of system is greater gas mileage on the road, as the engine doesn't need to power all 4 wheels all the time.  The disadvantage is that extreme off-roading and the accompanying low-traction situations can catch the system by surprize.  However, rolling up on a sandy beach certainly shouldn't confuse such a system.  Full-time AWD, as on a Subaru Forester, for example, distributes drive power to all 4 wheels all the time, and proportions more or less power to each wheel individually based on the amount of traction that wheel has. This system is much more effective in extreme low-traction scenarios, but also requires the engine to drive all wheels all the time, thus lowering MPG.  

Anyway, if upfront cost isn't a huge issue, but long-term affordability (gas mileage, maintenance) IS a big issue, look towards the 4 cylinder small/mid size SUVs.  Larger SUVs like the Pilot, 4runner, and Xterra all weigh over 4000lb, and are motivated by largish V6 engines.  They all get in the high Teens City MPG, and low 20s highway.  I assume his qualifies as "poor" gas mileage.  

The RAV4 might have "questionable" off-road ability, but then, you only plan on driving it up on a sandy beach.  Shouldn't be a problem.  It's also reliable and big enough for 2 dogs and a couple kids.  And come to think of it, if you desire a bit of power, the V6 model gets 22/29 MPG EPA, and is particularly fast--actaully among the fastest SUVs on the market, regardless of size.  

The Honda CRV doesn't come with a V6, but its 2.4L 4 Cyl is among the best 4 cyl engines available on any car.  It's also big enough for dogs and kids, and gets 23/30 MPG.  It's also a brand new design, with classy interior materials and rather fresh styling.  Personally, I find it a lot more interesting to look at and sit in than the also-newish RAV4, which I find rather boring.  Good. But boring.  

The Subaru Forrester is a personal favorite of mine, and not because I own one or own stock in Fuji Heavy Industries or anything.  But it's got a genuine full-time AWD system, rugged structure, punchy 2.5L 4Cyl engine, and decent gas mileage (23/28).  Subarus are known for their longevity and reliability, and it's big boxy body (that I find utilitarian, but others find dorky) is great for swallowing big dogs and bulky landscaping equipment.  And if you want more power to compete with the RAV4 or something, you can get the "XT" model, which has a turbo version of the same engine, which is remarkably powerful.  Mileage for that engine is 21/26).  And if SUV styling isn't a must-have, the Subaru Outback is an even better option, with a longer wheelbase for more cargo room, classy interior, and the same engine choices and competent AWD system as the forrester.    

Nissan will be comming out with the "Rogue" in the next couple months, a 4 cylinder smallish SUV to compete with the RAV4, CRV, and Forrester.  It's very stylish, looking like a mini Murano, and seems well equipped.  But a quick look at a recent autoshow left me with the impression that it wasn't as spacious as the Toyota or Honda.

Take a look at the Mitsubishi Outlander, while you're at it.  It's an all-new model that I think is freshly styled inside and out.  It sorta splits the difference between the RAV4/4runner and CRV/Pilot by offering a  big cargo area with a small 3 liter V6.  Gas mileage also splits the difference between small and medium SUVs, with 19/26 MPG.  

So hopefully this list does add to the confusion.  Hope it helps  

"Funny you should mention that you were considering the FJ Cruiser because, given your criteria, that seems to be among the worst options."

Yeah, that's exactly why it's off the list.  At first it didn't seem so bad as it gets semi average (for an SUV) MPG and while the back is small for adults, for pets/kids it's fine...  But the more I read about it the more I realized I was in love with it's style, not it's worth.

The RAV4 and Highlander are both high on my list right now.  Given what I've said would your recommend one over the other?  We're going to test drive each one tonight. The CRV and Forester aren't bad but they're not really on our list as the style just doesn't fit us.

Most likely we'll end up with a Highlander or RAV4, but something a little more expensive could be considered if a good deal is found at auction.  The mileage on those bigger ones isn't TOO bad as it's average for an SUV...nothing like a good car but still.

Other options we're really looking at are the Commander and Grand Cherokee and like I said, the Pilot.  

Well the RAV4 and Highlander are both offered by Toyota because they fit into different size categories.  Aside from styling, the only real difference between the two is size.  They're both Toyotas, so they'll both be reliable and easy to use.  So I suppose the real issue is whether you want a bigger SUV with the corresponding spaciousness and gas mileage, or a smaller one that trades a bit of space for better economy.  Once you've driven them, perhaps your mind will be made up.  The Highlander, as good an SUV as it is, is an ageing design and the rather Blah styling inside and out shows it.  But there was never anything fundamentally wrong with the Highlander, so if you feel like you need the space, it's a great choice.  Previously, Highlanders were only available with a 3liter V6 that made 220HP.  While not slow, it was...well ok it was kinda slow.  That was the only complaint I had about it when I rented one a few years back.  But the new corporate 3.5L V6 used accross the board in almost every V6 powered toyota and Lexus is very powerful indeed.  And it'll feel even more so in the lighter RAV4, if you were to choose that option.  

The Commander and Grand Cherokee are both a big step up in weight and "truckiness," and I think for the worse.  Historically, people who've owned Cherokees have loved them, but I wonder how much of that was a love for the fashionability of driving a truck that was somewhat illsuited to on-road use.  The latest models are far better on-road, but get generally poor gas mileage, and the Commander is bigger and less efficient.  

Personally, i don't like either because they don't offer anything more than competing car-based SUVs, unless you need heavy offroading capability or V8 trailer pulling power.  Combine this with a generally inferior reliability reputation, and I can't see a good reason to choose the Chryslers over the Toyotas.  And further, if the off-road capability and high seating position of a truck-based SUV is important, the Toyota 4Runner is a better car.  

But as long as you're still open to the Honda Pilot, I'd put that at the top of My list if I were in the market simply because it's as big and utilitable as a Highlander, and I think more interestingly styled inside and out.  I've not driven one extensively, but the general consensus among automotive journalists seems to be that the pilot is far more engaging to drive than almost anything else in its size/price class.  

Hey, I was wrong about the Highlander's engine.  For some reason, I had assumed that, like every other Toyota available with a V6, the Highlander had recieved the new 3.5 liter upgrade.  This is not the case.  It comes with a 3.3 liter 215HP V6 that powered the highlanders I drove a few years ago.  I thought it was a bit pokey, but it certainly got the job done.  

Unfortunately, despite the power deficit compared to the Honda pilot, it still gets the same gas mileage.

In case you haven't made up your mind yet, be aware that there's an all-new 2008 Highlander just around the corner.  I expect it to be heavily improved given the very stiff competition that's sprouted up around it.