OT: Compact SUV recommendations?

[FanuSanu52]

I really really want to want the grand cherokee... I love my 2003 Jeep. I sat in the 2015 one, and I wanted to barf (wannabe luxury soccer mommy car gag reflex). It just felt wrong, and not like a jeep. Myabe I need to give it another look?

Why are you looking at crossovers, anyway? Sounds like you're a Jeep guy from the days that Jeeps were Jeeps (and not alien lifeforms like that ugly new Cherokee). Crossovers are the absolute definition of "wannabe SUV" - "urban adventure vehicle" is one of the more fashionable terms with marketing folks.

Luxurious or not, the Grand Cherokee is still one of the most capable mid-size SUVs out there. I'd be looking at that over the Fiat Renegade for sure.

I'd also be looking at the Toyota 4Runner, one of the only body-on-frames left. I just put about 500 miles on a Trail spec, including on some rough, single-width 4x4 trail, and it was a versatile beast - went from eating that stuff up to driving super-smooth and comfy on the highway. Might be too big for you, but I'd look at it anyway, at least to compare crossover car to SUV truck.

Just read that larger SUVs are gaining momentum again now that gas is down (leave it to Americans for shortsighted thinking), so maybe that'll reverse the course of auto cos cutting all the real SUVs in favor of building bulging lineups of soccer mom CUVs. I'll never forgive Nissan for turning the Pathfinder into a big, fat AWD hatch-wagon, then cancelling the Xterra a couple years later - how many crossovers can one company make?

 

[RUSK97]

Just read that larger SUVs are gaining momentum again now that gas is down (leave it to Americans for shortsighted thinking), so maybe that'll reverse the course of auto cos cutting all the real SUVs in favor of building bulging lineups of soccer mom CUVs. I'll never forgive Nissan for turning the Pathfinder into a big, fat AWD hatch-wagon, then cancelling the Xterra a couple years later - how many crossovers can one company make?

You can chide automakers all you want, but there's one reason and one reason alone why they're replacing body-on-frame SUVs with unibody crossovers - that's what the buyers vote for with their dollars. SUVs drive like their forebears - trucks. They don't corner well, they don't handle well, they are heavy and wretched on fuel economy. Most SUVs will true off road capability never even see a dirt road, never mind a trail.

 

[m1ipabrams]

Why are you looking at crossovers, anyway? Sounds like you're a Jeep guy from the days that Jeeps were Jeeps (and not alien lifeforms like that ugly new Cherokee).?

To each their own, I happen to think the new Cherokee is pretty good looking. And at least I can find it in the parking lot amongst all of those identical looking half melted crossovers.

 

[RU4Real]

You can chide automakers all you want, but there's one reason and one reason alone why they're replacing body-on-frame SUVs with unibody crossovers - that's what the buyers vote for with their dollars. SUVs drive like their forebears - trucks. They don't corner well, they don't handle well, they are heavy and wretched on fuel economy. Most SUVs will true off road capability never even see a dirt road, never mind a trail.

That's only partially true - and by "partially", I mean maybe 10%.

Body on frame vehicles are more expensive to manufacture and also much more difficult to engineer to current collision safety standards. A modern "chassis", composed entirely of the body-in-white, stamped and folded, is lighter, less expensive and deforms more consistently in a crash.

 

[HeyHuey]

I have a 2015 Rogue. Wife has a 2015 CRV. Interior - Edge to Honda. CVT- Edge to Honda. Acceleration - Edge to Honda. Driving experience - Edge to Rogue (carlike feel). The paint on the Rogue seems to scratch more easily and I wonder what the difference is around clear coat and paint technology.

 

[RU4Real]

I have a 2015 Rogue. Wife has a 2015 CRV. Interior - Edge to Honda. CVT- Edge to Honda. Acceleration - Edge to Honda. Driving experience - Edge to Rogue (carlike feel). The paint on the Rogue seems to scratch more easily and I wonder what the difference is around clear coat and paint technology.

Neither one has sufficient power except for people to whom power and performance doesn't matter. Also, Honda's infotainment systems are a full generation behind the market leaders.

If you're heart is set on something in this category then my recommendation would be Cherokee (with the V6) or Escape (with the 2.0 turbo) and nothing else.

 

[RUSK97]

That's only partially true - and by "partially", I mean maybe 10%.

Body on frame vehicles are more expensive to manufacture and also much more difficult to engineer to current collision safety standards. A modern "chassis", composed entirely of the body-in-white, stamped and folded, is lighter, less expensive and deforms more consistently in a crash.

Disagree. Body on frame uses more material, so yes, it may nominally cost more material per unit, but that cost is offset by the engineering savings. Frames go decades between design and those used on SUVs are shared with their pickup truck brethren. It makes model updates on the chassis cheaper and quicker to put out. SUVs were cash cows for major manufacturers partly due to this reason.

Ultimately, I stand by my original point: If consumers wanted body on frame, manufacturers would continue to pump out body on frame SUVs, cost savings or no. The things that consumers value (car-like handling, fuel economy) are easier to come by with monocoque construction.

 

[RU4Real]

Disagree. Body on frame uses more material, so yes, it may nominally cost more material per unit, but that cost is offset by the engineering savings. Frames go decades between design and those used on SUVs are shared with their pickup truck brethren. It makes model updates on the chassis cheaper and quicker to put out. SUVs were cash cows for major manufacturers partly due to this reason.

Ultimately, I stand by my original point: If consumers wanted body on frame, manufacturers would continue to pump out body on frame SUVs, cost savings or no. The things that consumers value (car-like handling, fuel economy) are easier to come by with monocoque construction.

Body on frame vehicles do not perform well, overall, in crash tests.

Fact.

I'm not going to argue the nuance of this point with you. A stamped chassis is less expensive to produce, results in lower weight which improves fuel economy and is, for 99% of all vehicle use cases, perfectly sufficient with respect to design load.

The vast majority of consumers don't know the difference and so that factor isn't part of the overall calculus. Body on frame vehicles are used for pickups and heavy SUVs because they're required for proper load distribution, especially when tow ratings are a crucial selling point. You can't sell an 8,000 lb tow rating with a Honda Ridgeline.

 

[FanuSanu52]

You can chide automakers all you want, but there's one reason and one reason alone why they're replacing body-on-frame SUVs with unibody crossovers - that's what the buyers vote for with their dollars. SUVs drive like their forebears - trucks. They don't corner well, they don't handle well, they are heavy and wretched on fuel economy. Most SUVs will true off road capability never even see a dirt road, never mind a trail.

But there are still people that want an SUV built to be driven off road, and AWD crossovers just don't cut it. We do live in a country whose best-selling vehicle is a pickup truck.

Small/mid-size SUVs handle just fine on the road, btw, and no longer need to be horrible on fuel economy.

We'll see. SUVs have been making a documented comeback and there are some interesting new products on the horizon. The market doesn't have to be Jeep's alone.

 

[FanuSanu52]

To each their own, I happen to think the new Cherokee is pretty good looking. And at least I can find it in the parking lot amongst all of those identical looking half melted crossovers.

It'd be alright for a product not called "cherokee." As a "cherokee," it's a human rights violation.

 

[CornerTavern]

OK, here's what I'm going to test drive today…
The Mazda CX 5
The Ford Edge,
Jeep Cherokee
Toyota RAV 4
Maybe the Hyundai Tuscon

I have given up on the Subaru crosstrek, the engine is too weak

 

[RU4Real]

The Edge is an outlier among those selections. It's larger and much heavier.

 

[CornerTavern]

: /

You're prob right

I just wish the Escape was better rated

 

[RU4Real]

: /

You're prob right

I just wish the Escape was better rated

Mine was great. Its only drawbacks were marginal fuel economy (all MPG claims in the CUV/SUV categories are spectacular lies) and that it was uncomfortable on long drives. Most manufacturers cheat on their legroom numbers by shortening the seat cushions. I hate that.

 

[m1ipabrams]

Mine was great. Its only drawbacks were marginal fuel economy (all MPG claims in the CUV/SUV categories are spectacular lies) and that it was uncomfortable on long drives. Most manufacturers cheat on their legroom numbers by shortening the seat cushions. I hate that.

Drove my new Cherokee up to the Poconos yesterday. Almost 4?hour drive with wife and two kids and all of our stuff for a long weekend. Very comfortable to drive and plenty of power for passing and climbing hills. Obviously is a truck with a slightly rougher ride, but don't really notice it on the highway.

 

[CornerTavern]

So, we test drove the Mazda CX-5, Ford Escape, the Toyota RAV 4, and finally the Hyundai Santa Fe.
CX-5 was good, nice overall quality. Engine was ok.
Ford had a nice engine, not as nice overall.
RAV4 was my least favorite.

The Santa Fe was the nicest, but also the most expensive. They quoted me 375 a month for 36 month lease, and then it got knocked down to 350 just for having said we'd like to sleep on it. I still left.

Will go back Monday.

 

[RU4Real]

So, we test drove the Mazda CX-5, Ford Escape, the Toyota RAV 4, and finally the Hyundai Santa Fe.
CX-5 was good, nice overall quality. Engine was ok.
Ford had a nice engine, not as nice overall.
RAV4 was my least favorite.

The Santa Fe was the nicest, but also the most expensive. They quoted me 375 a month for 36 month lease, and then it got knocked down to 350 just for having said we'd like to sleep on it. I still left.

Will go back Monday.

Seems like a pretty good assessment.

Ya know, if you're shopping a monthly lease payment then they're gonna get you one way or the other. You should never negotiate a payment - even if you're leasing, negotiate the price of the vehicle first. Don't even tell them that you're leasing vs. buying.

 

[Knight Shift]

So, we test drove the Mazda CX-5, Ford Escape, the Toyota RAV 4, and finally the Hyundai Santa Fe.
CX-5 was good, nice overall quality. Engine was ok.
Ford had a nice engine, not as nice overall.
RAV4 was my least favorite.

The Santa Fe was the nicest, but also the most expensive. They quoted me 375 a month for 36 month lease, and then it got knocked down to 350 just for having said we'd like to sleep on it. I still left.

Will go back Monday.

Did you rule out the GMC? Talked to both people in our office who have one, and they are very happy.

 

[mildone]

Seems like a pretty good assessment.

Ya know, if you're shopping a monthly lease payment then they're gonna get you one way or the other. You should never negotiate a payment - even if you're leasing, negotiate the price of the vehicle first. Don't even tell them that you're leasing vs. buying.

That's true in terms of other things like trade-ins or financing, etc. Always negotiate the price of the car first without letting on you're going to make a trade-in or going to want to lease vs. finance vs. pay cash. And go in armed with all the cost information about the car, including, if you can get it, the average price paid for that car w/your options in your region.

 

[RUtix4me]

We have a tigun (vw) $250 per month, xc 60 (volvo) $380, and a suburban. No issues with any, xc 60 may work for you?

 

[Knight Shift]

So, we test drove the Mazda CX-5, Ford Escape, the Toyota RAV 4, and finally the Hyundai Santa Fe.
CX-5 was good, nice overall quality. Engine was ok.
Ford had a nice engine, not as nice overall.
RAV4 was my least favorite.

The Santa Fe was the nicest, but also the most expensive. They quoted me 375 a month for 36 month lease, and then it got knocked down to 350 just for having said we'd like to sleep on it. I still left.

Will go back Monday.

$375 a month for a Hyundai? See RUtix4Me's post above-driving a Volvo for $380/month. I'd keep looking.

 

[_dave_]

It works like a 10 speed where a computer is working the front and rear derailers with the idea of optimizing torque.

Maybe this is why most of the new high end mountain bikes went away from the front derailleur in the last couple years.

 

[_dave_]

OK, here's what I'm going to test drive today…
The Mazda CX 5
The Ford Edge,
Jeep Cherokee
Toyota RAV 4
Maybe the Hyundai Tuscon

I have given up on the Subaru crosstrek, the engine is too weak

As mentioned, the engine in the 2012 and later subarus is precisely why I traded in my "new" Impreza for a "used" 4Runner of the same year.

 

[RUBand]

I don't know why they just don't put the engine from the Outback in the Impreza (if I'm remembering correctly, it is a different engine).

 

[RUBand]

Do these two guys, per chance, own WRXs?

I've read that Subaru states that oil consumption of a quart per 1,000 miles is normal.......hmm. Meanwhile, my 2010 Sonata w/ 163,000 runs like new (Mobile 1, Purolator upgraded filter, as per research performed by two scientists who are also mechanics - Royal Purple and AmsOil by far the best, all the rest not even close, except Mobile 1. Filters, same two companies for the filters, then the rest, except for upgrade version of Purolators. These guys did extensive research, were shocked how cheap and flimsy Fram's were (surprised someone didn't loose an engine from a rock kicking up and penetrating the filter, outer skin so thin).

 

[Saint Puppy]

Got a Certified Pre-Owned Honda CRV several years ago and have been very happy with it!

 

[RULoyal]

My buddy is a mechanic and he is not a fan of the new Jeeps.

 

[rutgersal]

So, we test drove the Mazda CX-5, Ford Escape, the Toyota RAV 4, and finally the Hyundai Santa Fe.
CX-5 was good, nice overall quality. Engine was ok.
Ford had a nice engine, not as nice overall.
RAV4 was my least favorite.

The Santa Fe was the nicest, but also the most expensive. They quoted me 375 a month for 36 month lease, and then it got knocked down to 350 just for having said we'd like to sleep on it. I still left.

Will go back Monday.

you really should read up on leases before you agree to a lease. RU4REAL is right. negotiate the price of the vehicle first. you should also ask what money factor they're using, and whether that can be reduced by putting down a security deposit, which gets returned to you, once the lease is ended. Finally, never put money down as a capitalized cost reduction, because you can lose the money if the car gets into an accident. its fine to pay for fees upfront like the bank fee, mv fees, etc. Edmunds.com has great articles on leasing.

 

[m1ipabrams]

My buddy is a mechanic and he is not a fan of the new Jeeps.

You could read that a couple of different ways.....

 

[RULoyal]

You could read that a couple of different ways.....

You're right - let me rephrase....He doesn't think they are particularly well made. I was thinking about getting one and he said "Don't".

 

[RUpop]

My buddy is a mechanic and he is not a fan of the new Jeeps.

There were some issues early on with some owners head units. I think they've gotten that figured out. Luckily I have had zero issue with my Grand Cherokee Summit. Great suv with a fantastic ride and pretty much any eminity you'd want in a daily use vehicle

 

[FanuSanu52]

Long ago, Jeep reserved a spot at the bottom of the major reliability studies. I think it wanted to be near its brother Dodge.

Pretty good foresight if you ask me - given the number of auto scandals and problems we've seen in recent years, the two might have gotten split up otherwise. FAMILY.

 

[Knightmoves]

My current vehicle is the V6 Ford Escape limited. Previous SUVs were the Toyota 4Runner and Ford Explorer.

4Runner was by far the best. A true off-road vehicle that has a real set of culyones. It is an 04 and my son is now very happy with driving it with 190K highway miles on it.

Current Ford Escape is very solid. Not quick or super economical but I'm very happy with its performance. Easily holds my golf clubs and softball gear in the rear hatch with a nice sized back seat and comfortable ride.

Ford Explorer was a full notch below the above but I got 386K highway miles on it before it hit the scrap heap. No complaints for the value I got from it.

 

[RU4Real]

My current vehicle is the V6 Ford Escape limited. Previous SUVs were the Toyota 4Runner and Ford Explorer.

4Runner was by far the best. A true off-road vehicle that has a real set of culyones. It is an 04 and my son is now very happy with driving it with 190K highway miles on it.

Current Ford Escape is very solid. Not quick or super economical but I'm very happy with its performance. Easily holds my golf clubs and softball gear in the rear hatch with a nice sized back seat and comfortable ride.

Ford Explorer was a full notch below the above but I got 386K highway miles on it before it hit the scrap heap. No complaints for the value I got from it.

That would be the previous generation Escape, which was discontinued in '12. The current Escape is actually a much better vehicle in terms of its overall dynamics. As I've said, I really liked mine, but the seats sucked past about 2 hours and that damn Sync system is maddening. Touch screens just don't belong in cars. Audi's MMI system, especially the new one, is awesome - big screen front and center but everything is controlled with a dial (that has a touchpad on it) and 4 adjacent buttons.

 

[RUBand]

My buddy is a mechanic and he is not a fan of the new Jeeps.

My mechanic told me to go ahead and buy one, it will be good for his business.

 

[Knightmoves]

That would be the previous generation Escape, which was discontinued in '12. The current Escape is actually a much better vehicle in terms of its overall dynamics. As I've said, I really liked mine, but the seats sucked past about 2 hours and that damn Sync system is maddening. Touch screens just don't belong in cars. Audi's MMI system, especially the new one, is awesome - big screen front and center but everything is controlled with a dial (that has a touchpad on it) and 4 adjacent buttons.

Yes my Escape is a 2010, more of a box shaped rear than the current streamlined version, but rides well and a good amount of storage space in the back.

 

[DontTedonMe]

So it's that time... my 2003 Jeep Cherokee finally died after 13 years and ~150,000 miles.

I'm looking to get a short lease on a compact-but-capable SUV, such as the Subaru Crosstrek or perhaps the Jeep Renegade?

I need something that can actually take a bike rack on the tail with a trailer hitch, boat rack on top, etc. Not looking for a wannabe "luxury SUV" like the Cherokee has become.

Any recommendations?

Take a look at the Kia Sorrento

 

[RU4Real]

Take a look at the Kia Sorrento

The Sorrento is one size above the OP's target class. The corresponding Kia would be the Sportage.

 

[CornerTavern]

You're right - let me rephrase....He doesn't think they are particularly well made. I was thinking about getting one and he said "Don't".

this is pretty much why I haven't seriously considered the Jeeps. I went to the showroom last year, liked the quirky look of the renegade and didn't like any other car's feel. The transmission or the renegade on the test drive was... weird. and everything I've heard since then is that the jeeps are not well made, and there are still its of problems with the engines and transmissions across all models.

 

[CornerTavern]

Take a look at the Kia Sorrento

I drove the Kia Sportage today - drove OK, but the interior quality did not match the price quoted.