SUV Recommendations

[nofishfisherman]

Its time for us to replace our 10 year old SUV and I'm hoping people can give me some recommendations on mid sized SUV's based on your experience.  We currently have a 2005 Mazda Tribute. We like the size and its capabilities but haven't been real happy with some of the maintenance we've had to do to it.

This car will be my wife's daily driver and will likely also be used for longer road trips as we'll need the room for 2 kids, a dog, and the stuff that goes with them.  

Here are some of the considerations:

Gas mileage 

cargo space - I prefer seats to fold down flat

Comfort of the ride

How well it handles snow and less than ideal roads

I'd like for it to have reasonable towing capacity.  I don't own a boat now but want to make sure I'll have a vehicle that can handle a small boat in the future plus other smaller trailer loads (no plan on towing wheel houses or large boats)

Maintenance costs - Getting tired of the Mazda Tribute and its poor design.  Replacing the alternator required taking half the car apart which really jacks up repair costs. 

We are most likely going to be looking at used and want to keep this car on a budget thinking maybe $20-25,000 range).  I'm just not a big fan of committing a large monthly payment into a depreciating asset. 

I'd appreciate any feedback you have.  I'll listen to the good and bad experiences as both are valuable. 

[delcecchi]

We went through the same exercise last year and ended up with a 2015 Toyota Highlander.   The RAV4 also looks good but was a little bit small for our requirements.  It would be a great choice I think if it is big enough for you.   There are a lot of them around.   

I stopped buying used some years ago since the price for used seemed disproportionate for what I was getting.  It might be different now, however.  

The Honda CR-V is also a nice car. 

My highlander gets close to 25 mpg on the highway,  down to maybe 16 or so in town with a lot of short trips to the store etc.  At least that is what the display says. 

Highlanders were updated as of 2014.   Honda pilot was just updated for 2016 so any of those are equivalent.  

My 99 explorer did well by us, but I don't know much about the current line.  I see a lot of them. 

Consumer Reports liked the Suburu outback, the murano, and the hyundi santa fe.   in the 2 row category.

in three row,  the highlander and the kia sorento.  

Hope these thoughts help. 

[nofishfisherman]

The Toyota Highlander was one vehicle I've got on my list.  Not sure how I feel about the 3rd seat.  It would rarely get used and would spend most of the time folded down, does it cut into the useable cargo space in the back?  Thinking of a family trip with 2 adults and 2 kids and all the stuff.

We aren't totally sold on used it will just depend on what we find.  I agree that sometimes the price of used isn't worth it for what you get.  When we bought my car we'd only save 2-3,000 by going used but we'd have a car with 40,000 miles on it.  We'll just have to see what makes sense when we pick out the make and model.

I know my wife would like the Suburu Outback but haven't see many in the range of what we want to pay, at least not without a lot of miles on them.

[delcecchi]

The third row in the highlander folds flat.  It does take some space that would otherwise be available, but my two row explorer didn't have any more space.

Subaru might be one of those you have to pay up and buy new. 

I think outback is more the size of rav4 than highlander. 

Is towing important?

 

Edited November 19, 2015 by delcecchi

[nofishfisherman]

Towing isn't critical as I currently don't have anything that needs towing.  However, I have used my Tribute to tow a few times and it was nice to have the option when needed.  Also I would like to get a small boat sometime in the future so it would be nice to already have a vehicle capable of towing it in case I can make the boat happen.

I'll check out the Highlander.  I've seen some in our price range and from what I could see I liked everything else about the vehicle.  I'm also going to check out the Santa Fe.

[h8go4s]

We have a 2006 Santa Fe and would buy another one. 140,00 miles and going strong. Outside of normal maintenance, all we've had to do is replace 3 oxygen sensors. It compares with the Highlander very well. As for maintenance costs, I don't know that any modern vehicle is cheap. Everything is packed in under the hood and shrouded with plastic. Ours is all-wheel drive, so gas mileage is compromised, but in Minnesota, with a wife who is not the best driver, I consider it a necessity. Don't tell her I said that.

[nofishfisherman]

Thanks for the insight.  You guys have reinforced my thinking on 2 cars (Highlander and Santa Fe) so I'll for sure go check them out in person.  

[Jeremy airjer W]

I think you will find the highlander is a litter more spacious than the hyundai. I also think you will find that the highlander drives/feels a little better than the santa fe.

I just put a radiator in a santa fe that had 312,000 miles on it. Original motor and transmission (v-6). It has had tires, brakes, drive axles, lower ball joints, timing belts, tune ups, valve cover gaskets, filler neck, power steering hoses, and a radiator. Not to bad for that many miles.

The outback and the forrester are not bad options either. There all wheel drive is second to none and aside from some potential major repairs on some model years they are pretty bullet proof. The downside to the subaru is they still use a timing belt on there four cylinder engines up to 2013, i think.  After 2013 all the engines are using timing chains. Again, i am not sure of the switch date but I am pretty sure the newer model year 2.5 liters are now timing chain driven.

[nofishfisherman]

I think you will find the highlander is a litter more spacious than the hyundai. I also think you will find that the highlander drives/feels a little better than the santa fe.

I just put a radiator in a santa fe that had 312,000 miles on it. Original motor and transmission (v-6). It has had tires, brakes, drive axles, lower ball joints, timing belts, tune ups, valve cover gaskets, filler neck, power steering hoses, and a radiator. Not to bad for that many miles.

The outback and the forrester are not bad options either. There all wheel drive is second to none and aside from some potential major repairs on some model years they are pretty bullet proof. The downside to the subaru is they still use a timing belt on there four cylinder engines up to 2013, i think.  After 2013 all the engines are using timing chains. Again, i am not sure of the switch date but I am pretty sure the newer model year 2.5 liters are now timing chain driven.

Thanks for the feedback.  Thats good info to have on repairs.

Do you have any experience with the newer Jeep Cherokees?  I'm seeing several in our price range and I like the look but I'm seeing some poor reviews mainly around the transmission.  I'm seeing people are having to replace the transmission sometimes multiple times.  Its hard to know if this is a truly widespread issue or if I'm just seeing reviews from the upset 1% of owners who had issues.

The Cherokee does seem to have smaller cargo area so I'll have to look at that in person.

[delcecchi]

Cherokee was redesigned in 2014 or name resurrected anyway.  Consumer Reports wasn't thrilled, especially with the 4 cyl.  The tranny appears to continue to have issues, reliability wise.  (Our public library has online Consumer Reports. )

	This small SUV could be a contender, but the Dart-based Cherokee is too underdeveloped and unrefined. If you have your heart set on one, get the 3.2-liter V6 in Limited trim. The 2.4-liter four-cylinder is slow and gets lousy fuel economy for the class at just 22 mpg overall. The nine-speed automatic is not all that responsive or refined. Handling is competent, but short on agility and the ride is jittery. It's a quiet SUV, with a comfortable backseat and a state-of-the-art infotainment system. Limited trims can be equipped with many high-end features. The Trailhawk is very capable off-road, and the V6 can tow an impressive 4,500 pounds. Reliability has been much below average.

That was the overview for the 2014.  Here is for the 2016

Road Test

The Cherokee finally gives Jeep a small SUV for those who want the brand's trail cred but don't want to pay Grand Cherokee prices. And while it does offer a lot of workhorse capability for this class, it fails to get a lot of the day-to-day basics right.

The list of flaws is long. Performance and fuel economy from the four-cylinder engine is pathetic. It struggles and feels underpowered, while returning only 22 mpg overall, which makes the Cherokee one of the least fuel-efficient models in this category. The V6 is far more pleasant and is definitely the better choice, but it still isn't particularly quick. A new nine-speed automatic transmission may give the Cherokee bragging rights, but it delivers rough, unrefined, and ill-timed shifts. Thick roof pillars hurt visibility and the driving position is awkward. Handling is competent but dull, and the ride is jittery.

Access and cargo room are OK, but they fall short of many better competitors.

Based on the same Fiat-derived platform as the Dodge Dart small sedan, the Cherokee feels half-baked, as if it was rushed to market, despite a delay of almost nine months from its initial launch date.

On the plus side, the Jeep is relatively quiet and has a roomy rear seat. It also offers a plethora of luxury-level features and high-tech electronic safety gear. The Uconnect 8.4 touch screen combines top-level connectivity with friendly usability. And if you need your small SUV to tow 4,500 pounds or tackle tough off-road conditions, the Cherokee may be your only choice. Most small-SUV buyers don't need those capabilities, however, and probably wouldn't use them.

The Cherokee also comes with a stiff sticker price. Even basic Cherokees are pricey, yet they lack features that many rivals offer standard for less money. In the end, neither of the two Cherokees we tested scored high enough to be recommended.
 

The Driving Experience

Handling: The Cherokee feels secure but not particularly responsive, thanks to fairly slow turn-in response. At least body roll is not excessive, staying mostly even-keeled in corners. The steering has nice weight, but doesn't transmit much feedback. The optional LaneSense system's small tugs on the wheel, pulling you back into your traffic lane, further smother any real steering feedback. In terms of agility, the Cherokee is no match for a Ford Escape, Mazda CX-5 or Toyota RAV4. Even Chrysler's large Dodge Durango SUV feels more tied-down and responsive.

On the track, the Cherokee at least proved stable and predictable. It understeered benignly in corners at first, then transitioned to more neutral balance. If you lift off the throttle, it tightens its cornering line promptly. This Jeep posted a decent speed of 51 mph in our avoidance maneuver but its electronic stability control delivered inconsistent responses, making the SUV feel a little unpredictable and chipping away at driver confidence.

Optional park assist helps slot the Cherokee into tight parallel parking spots. Once activated, the system scans open spaces as you drive along, indicating when one is large enough. You then pull ahead of the space, shift into reverse, and take your hands off the wheel. The system handles the steering while you modulate braking. We've found that it does a good job -- but you're on your own for pulling out of the tight spot. Front and rear parking sensors (and the backup camera) help with that.

Powertrain: While two engines are available, most will get a 184-hp, 2.4-liter four-cylinder. Most small SUV competitors no longer offer a six-cylinder, but the Cherokee has a 271-hp, 3.2-liter V6 available. This engine is essentially a smaller version of Chrysler's ubiquitous 3.6-liter Pentastar V6. All Cherokees have a nine-speed automatic transmission -- one of the first in production. Cherokees come with either front-wheel-drive or all-wheel-drive; both of our test vehicles had the latter.

You might think that having one of the first nine-speed transmissions on the market would give the Cherokee an advantage; having more ratios typically improves fuel economy and performance. But there's more to the equation than that.

Put simply, performance and fuel economy from our four-cylinder all-wheel-drive Cherokee was pretty pathetic. It takes 10.9 seconds to go from 0-to-60 mph; that's two to three seconds slower than other four-cylinder competitors. And it sure doesn't make up for it with stellar fuel economy; we only recorded 22 mpg overall on regular fuel. Most other competitors deliver 24 to 26 mpg.

The 2.4-liter four-cylinder always winds up feeling overworked and outmatched by the heavy Cherokee. Its gruff engine note sounds unpleasant compared to the smoother V6.

Opting for the V6 does reward you with better performance and refinement; it's definitely the best choice between the two available engines. 0-to-60 mph takes 7.7 seconds, a huge improvement over the four-cylinder. Acceleration is more willing from the V6 as well, but you still need a fairly heavy throttle foot for it to move along.

We measured 21 mpg overall on regular fuel, so there isn't really much sacrifice for going with the V6 other than its $1,495 up charge. That said, consider that an Acura MDX is larger, quicker, and gets 20 mpg -- so the Jeep's V6 still isn't really competitive.

One big reason for the lackluster performance and fuel economy: the Cherokee is really heavy. Our Latitude four-cylinder weighs 3,960 pounds. That's nearly 500 more than most competitors and almost 300 more than a Ford Escape.

Going beyond just the performance numbers, the nine-speed transmission feels underdeveloped. Logbook comments described it as "bumpy," "confused," and "a mess." Somehow it manages to combine almost every negative trait that a transmission can have, exhibiting them randomly and unpredictably. With more torque and power than the four-cylinder, the 3.2-liter V6 makes the transmission's uncouth behavior somewhat more tolerable, but it isn't really improved.

Jeep didn't get the nine-speed transmission calibration right on early production cars. Later models, in particular, those built in mid-2014 with VINs ending in "317436," resulted in transmissions that are considerably better, though still not terrific.

Upshifts are now smooth in most situations. Part throttle downshifts, however, tend to require an extra prod on the gas pedal to get a lower gear and thus more power to keep up the speed on up hills. Combine that with the 2.4-liter's tepid power and the Jeep's hefty weight and you get very leisurely progress that doesn't contribute to confidence when merging or passing.

While the transmission says it has nine gears, you don't often get the top gear. Expect to see it only when cruising downhill at highway speeds.

"Manual" gear selections are available by pushing the shift lever to the left and toggling it back and forth. Like most competitors, no manual transmission is available.

The AWD system is mostly unobtrusive but some front wheel spin is noticeable when taking off on slippery pavement before power is transferred to the rear.

Off-road: Three different four-wheel-drive systems are available -- impressive given that most small SUVs have only one system with no low range and limited off-roading capability. Most all-wheel-drive Cherokees have Active Drive I, an all-wheel-drive system that includes settings for snow, mud, and sand. You can pretty much leave it in Auto mode and forget it, as the system sends power to all wheels only when needed.

Active Drive II includes a low-range for more intensive off-roading, and hill descent control. It's also usually packaged with an off-road suspension. There's also a handy mode for disengaging the drive system, allowing the Cherokee to be towed four-wheels-down behind a motor home.

True off-roaders will opt for the Trailhawk version. It includes off-road tires, an extra inch of ground clearance, and the Jeep Active Drive Lock 4x4 system with a locking rear differential. Protective underbody skid plates and electronics that let the Jeep crawl up and down over obstacles without the driver touching the throttle make off-roading easy.

We've found that the Trailhawk is surprisingly capable off-road, certainly exceeding the capability of most small SUVs. It climbed our tough rock hill course with ease, offering good traction and decent ground clearance. The Trailhawk is the only Cherokee version that merits the brand's "Trail Rated" badge.

Off-road capabilities aside, plenty of buyers will probably be attracted to the Trailhawk for its butch and rugged looks, complete with red-painted tow hooks front-and-rear. Vanity-minded buyers should note that on-road handling is more ponderous and less agile than other Cherokees thanks to the different tires and elevated ride height.

Towing: All Cherokees can tow 2,000 pounds, which is slightly higher than a typical small SUV's 1,500 pound rating. That's the maximum for four-cylinder models. Adding the $495 Trailer Tow Group to V6-powered Cherokees allows them to tow 4,500 pounds -- 1,000 pounds more than its next closest rival, the 2.0-liter EcoBoost Ford Escape.

The Trailer Tow Group adds a hitch, trailer wiring, a full-size spare tire, and upgraded engine cooling and alternator. It also includes wiring for a brake controller; instead of having to run wires, all you need to do is connect the controller to the provided wire pigtail and plug it in under the dashboard. That's an unusual convenience in this class.

All Cherokees come with trailer sway control which uses the vehicle's stability control to help control trailer sway. That's still no excuse for not using proper weight distribution and trailer hitch sway control as needed. It reacts to try to control the problem, rather than proactively working to prevent it.

Ride comfort: The Cherokee's ride is compliant, isolating most pavement flaws. Frequent short pitches, however, can make the ride feel unsettled. Our 2.4-liter Latitude, with its 17-inch tires and taller sidewalls, masks this phenomenon somewhat better than the Limited's 18-inch tires. But this underlying nervousness still tends to make the car more fatiguing than it should be.

Noise: One of the Cherokee's main advantages over other SUVs is how quiet it is inside. Road noise and wind hiss stay low in the background. The four cylinder sounds rough and busy, working hard to motivate this heavy SUV, and the transmission is constantly shifting to maintain speed. The V6 sounds more refined and relaxed.

Braking: Our Cherokees were equipped with different tire/wheel combinations. The Limited came with 18-inch Continental ProContact TXs, while the Latitude has 17-inch Firestone Destination LE2s. Braking performance in the Limited was very good, with short stops wet or dry. The Latitude required longer stopping distances, especially in the wet. Brake pedal modulation is similar in both Jeeps with a bit of travel before firming up and giving you some feedback.

Headlights: Both the standard halogen headlights in our tested Latitude and the optional bi-xenon HIDs in our Limited had so-so low-beam reach. That makes it hard to see nighttime obstacles in time to react and brake. The HIDs are brighter, but do not reach any further than the halogens. If you're buying the expensive $1,595 Luxury group for the HIDs, those lights alone aren't worth the cost.

(it goes on if anyone wants the rest)

Edited December 7, 2015 by delcecchi
messed up quoting

[nofishfisherman]

Not exactly a glowing review.  I might have to scratch that one off the list. 

Thanks for posting that.

[delcecchi]

I think if I was looking for a small SUV, I would start with CRV or RAV4.  If that didn't pan out, excape or edge. 

I saw a dart the other day and I can't imagine exactly an SUV built on that platform.  But that is just me. 

[Jeremy airjer W]

The escape and edge are decent front wheel/all wheel drive options.

[nofishfisherman]

CRV and RAV4 are on the list but for whatever reason I just don't really like them.  However, I'm still going to look at them in person to give them their fair shot.  My mother in law has an Escape and I've driven it on one longer road trip.  I hated every minute of driving that car.  I found it to be uncomfortable and there were a lot of little things that annoyed me.  I'm guessing the fact my MIL owns it also didn't help endear the car to me.

[Ufatz]

Quit fooling around. Go get a Chevy Tahoe,  new or late model used.

[nofishfisherman]

Quit fooling around. Go get a Chevy Tahoe,  new or late model used.

You must have skimmed my first post and missed the price range   A new or late model used Tahoe is probably $20,000 out of my price range. Money doesn't grow on trees ya know.

 

[Ufatz]

You are right! Not only that,  your wife would probably not want a Tahoe as a daily driver. Look at a Chevy Trailblazer.  Know a couple people who have them and they are pleased.  A friend is in the auto business and he has told me a couple times they are good, solid, decent smallish SUV's.

Enjoy the hunt.

[nofishfisherman]

Well we ended up with a 2014 Mazda CX5. It wasn't originally on my list but we did a test drive while we were out looking at other cars and the drive was much nicer than the other SUV's in its class and it gets better gas mileage.  My daily driver is a Mazda 3 and the CX5 drives more like the 3 than an SUV.  Cargo space was decent and pretty comparable to the others.  Was able to get the car, upgrade to leather seats, and add a lifetime warranty for below what we had budgeted so I'm happy.  

[leechlake]

great choice.  My wife had gone through some foreign vehicles and got a Nissan CX9 or whatever the one is with three rows of seats.  She really liked it.  The only issue I could ever think of was that she thought the exterior was easily dented.  I'm not really sure that was true or her skills behind the wheel and parking strategy.   Congrats on new rig, always fun getting a new toy.  Have someone spill something in it so you can get it worn in.

[nofishfisherman]

I'm sure my daughter will take care of that in no time. 

My only concern is that I'm not sure my wife will let me put my ice fishing stuff in the back of the new car.  I always seem to track in some crud when loading the gear and she's never been a big fan of that.  Although now It might mean I finally have a reason to buy that small utility trailer I've been wanting.

[KurtHuber]

I'm sure my daughter will take care of that in no time. 

My only concern is that I'm not sure my wife will let me put my ice fishing stuff in the back of the new car.  I always seem to track in some crud when loading the gear and she's never been a big fan of that.

Get remnants at the fabric store of canvas or something coated (more water-resistant), a quick zip through a sewing machine makes a giant "tarp" that you can toss over the interior and is far easier to use than an actual tarp.

[nofishfisherman]

Get remnants at the fabric store of canvas or something coated (more water-resistant), a quick zip through a sewing machine makes a giant "tarp" that you can toss over the interior and is far easier to use than an actual tarp.

But then I don't get to buy a trailer.

Edited December 16, 2015 by nofishfisherman