By Tony Swan
Concerns about fuel prices may have tempered America's love affair with sport-utility vehicles, but it has by no means brought it to an end. Think of it as a refocusing, a renewal based on a reassessment of contemporary realities. As a consequence of these re-prioritized priorities, compact SUVs have become one of the hottest categories in a slowly reviving U.S. auto market.
We've rounded up five of the top contenders in the compact-crossover SUV class for this comparison. All are at the affordable end of the spectrum. Three are new -- the Ford Escape, Honda CR-V, and Mazda CX-5. Chevy's Equinox has been with us since the 2010 model year, while the Toyota RAV4 is the group's veteran, its current design dating to 2006. That's well beyond middle age in car years, but as one of the segment's strongest sellers the RAV4 can't be ignored.
We put the vehicles through their paces, poked, prodded, slammed doors, checked connectivity, cargo holds, front seats, back seats, fit, finish, and window stickers, debated details, argued merits, and ultimately came to a consensus.
Fifth Place: 2012 Toyota RAV4 LTD
The Toyota RAV4 has been with us since 1996, and has maintained a strong presence in the compact SUV class ever since. Although its novel semi-convertible and 3-door variants have long since disappeared, it continues to hold at least one trump card versus its many competitors -- an optional third-row seat.
The side-hinged rear door and external spare tire mount are unique to the RAV4 as well, but these distinctions are no longer perceived as positive, at least by our test crew. They're likely to disappear when this generation of the RAV4, number three, gives way to number four late this fall.
The redesign probably can't come too soon for Toyota dealers, because even after some cosmetic freshening last year, the current RAV4 is definitely showing its age. This is most apparent within, where lots of hard plastic lends a cheapish note to the interior materials, the instrumentation looks dated compared to some of the eye-pleasing displays in the new vehicles, and the nav screen isn't well shrouded, suffering from washout in bright sun as a consequence.
The seats provide reasonable comfort, though there's not much lateral support. Leather trim -- part of a $4,040 navigation option group -- enhances the interior experience, and the package also adds heating to the front seats (power adjustabile on the driver's side), plus power lumbar support. Besides the nav and seating highlights, the package also includes a power tilt/slide moonroof and a 120-volt AC power outlet.
The rear seats offer fore-aft adjustability, and the seatbacks also recline. The Toyota also boasts the top cargo capacity in this group. This generous cargo hold is a function of a design conceived to accommodate an optional third row of seating ($850), as noted earlier. It's a bragging point, but the reality of the RAV4's third row is extremely snug, making the fore-aft adjustability of the middle row a necessity, rather than a nicety.
While the RAV4 may be superannuated in some ways, its chassis rigidity still measures up well versus its newer competitors. However, Toyota has chosen to exploit this virtue in favor of smooth ride quality, rather than crisp responses. There's substantial body roll in hard cornering, and the electric power steering system confuses effort with road feel. The suspension tuning adds up to a vehicle that's reasonably comfortable, but not very engaging for the driver, despite excellent forward sightlines.
The RAV4's biggest dynamic demerit, however, lies with its powertrain -- specifically, its 4-speed automatic transmission. Toyota offers a very robust V6 engine option for this vehicle (269 horsepower, 246 lb-ft of torque) and a 5-speed automatic to go with it. But allied with the standard 2.5-liter 4-cylinder (179 horsepower, 172 lb-ft of torque) the gearing gaps make the engine work hard and loud when the driver kicks down for passing or a freeway merge.
With the exception of the Honda CR-V, most vehicles in this class offer 6-speed automatics, a plus for smooth performance and fuel economy. The 4-speed automatic underlines the fuel economy aspect. Even without 4-wheel drive, at 22 mpg city/28 highway, the RAV4's EPA fuel economy ratings are the lowest among the 4-cylinder vehicles in this group.
As noted, this RAV4 is essentially a lame duck. There's a major redesign en route, which will undoubtedly address some if not all of our reservations. However, a case can be made for acquiring the current model. Our well-equipped test vehicle -- leather, navi, power moonroof -- was competitively priced in this group at $29,090, and when the new 2013 Toyota RAV4s begin rolling into showrooms there are bound to be bargains among the remaining 2012 models.
Fourth Place: 2012 Chevrolet Equinox FWD LTZ
The Chevrolet Equinox competes in the compact category, but it's by far the biggest kid on this playground, as well as the heaviest. It's also the only vehicle in our test group to come to the starting line with a V6 engine -- 3.0 liters, 264 horsepower, 222 lb-ft of torque -- adding $1,500 to the bottom line.
As equipped, our front-drive test vehicle was EPA rated for 17 mpg city/24 highway, lowest in the test group -- it's intriguing to note that in 2013 models the V6 option is GM's even-more-powerful direct-injection 3.6-liter: 301 horsepower, 272 lb-ft of torque, with the same fuel economy ratings.
This is a strong testimonial for the efficiency of direct fuel injection, but if MPG is a top priority the best bet with the Equinox is the standard 2.4-liter 4-cylinder. Although its output -- 182 horsepower, 172 lb-ft of torque -- manages just ho-hum acceleration in a vehicle this size (curb weights can run up to two tons), its 22 mpg city/32 mpg highway ratings (20/29 with all-wheel drive) compare well with the rest of the class.
Fuel economy notwithstanding, test staff gripes with the 3.0-liter V6 had to do with performance. Considering its big edge in power, we expected a little more verve when the foot feed went floorward, but we were disappointed.
On the other hand, the standard 6-speed automatic was a typical GM Hydra-Matic unit -- smooth, responsive and equipped with a manual mode that operates via a little switch atop the shift lever. While this device is far from ideal, it does help to make the most of the engine's powerband.
Other categories on the Equinox's dynamic scorecard drew indifferent responses. The steering was criticized for heavy low-speed effort, and limited tactile information about what was going on with the front wheels. The substantial weight slowed responses in abrupt maneuvers, and the 40-foot turning circle (42 feet with 19-inch wheels) used up a lot of parking lot.
Still, ride quality was reasonably smooth, and the Equinox driver gets a better-than-average view of what's going on around the vehicle, particularly straight ahead.
While size may be a limiting factor in terms of dynamics, it does provide benefits inside. Rear-seat passengers in particular will appreciate the roomy interior, augmented by the rear seat's fore-aft adjustability. Even the center seating position is habitable for more than three blocks, something that can't be said for many 5-passenger vehicles.
However, rear seat roominess does come at the expense of some cargo space -- the Equinox is only mid-pack in this respect -- and the rear seats don't fold completely flat.
Although interior fit and finish didn't quite measure up to the Honda -- one or two trim panels that didn't quite match up, a few uneven panel gaps, some hard plastic saved from looking tacky by attractive graining -- the Equinox comes very well equipped in the LTZ trim level. The list of standard features includes power front seats, leather upholstery, heated front seats, heated power mirrors, Bluetooth connectivity, premium audio, a luggage rack, foglights, halogen projector beam headlights, and a power rear liftgate.
The V6 engine added $1,500, 18-inch chrome wheels another $1,000, red metallic paint $325, Chevy's MyLink hands-free smartphone integration $100, and GM's lane departure warning/forward collision alert system, $295 -- $3,220 in options.
The grand total: $33,250, the highest price tag in this group.
Third Place: 2013 Mazda CX-5 Grand Touring
Basically, Mazda's new system is a total vehicle approach -- in a word, holistic -- to engineering and design, integrating all elements: engine, transmission, chassis, bodyshell, suspension, brakes, steering, everything.
The process begins with the vehicle concept and continues through design to final production signoff, and it emphasizes two basic goals: minimizing mass, maximizing mpg. This isn't exactly new -- spurred by increasingly stringent fuel economy requirements, most carmakers are headed in the same direction.
But Mazda has taken the approach another step, and the CX-5 showcases the effort. Weighing in at less than 3,200 pounds with front-wheel drive and a 6-speed automatic transmission, the CX-5 is one of the lightest vehicles in this class.
Low mass and a fuel-thrifty 2.0-liter direct-injection 4-cylinder engine add up to high EPA mpg ratings: 25 city/31 highway, best in class for an all-wheel-drive compact crossover.
Unfortunately, the new engine's thriftiness comes at the expense of power. At 155 horsepower and 150 lb-ft of torque, the CX-5's engine trails the other four in this fleet, and that was a prime factor in keeping the Mazda from a top spot on the scorecards: 0-to-60 mph in about 9.5 seconds is about as deliberate as it gets in this class.
On the other hand, fun-to-drive isn't limited to acceleration. There are other elements -- feline responses, laser-precise steering, limited body roll. The CX-5's developmental priority may have been fuel economy, but Zoom-Zoom -- it's how you say fun-to-drive at Mazda -- is very much part of the mix. Think SUV usefulness with Miata soul.
Our CX-5 tester was a Grand Touring model, which includes a lot of upscale features as standard equipment: heated leather-trimmed seats (picked out with attractive red stitching), power moonroof, leather-wrapped steering wheel with auxiliary control switches (cruise, audio, Bluetooth), dual zone auto climate control, premium audio, power front seat adjustment, and 19-inch alloy wheels.
Safety features are consistent with contemporary standards: stability control, traction control, antilock braking, blind spot monitor, and air bags galore, though a rear cross-traffic detection system is conspicuous by its absence.
Although the interior color palette ran heavily to black, the Mazda drew high marks for the quality of its interior appointments, for a high level of fit and finish, and for its sporty front seats, which provided best-in-test lateral support. There were minor demerits for the instruments -- their gray on charcoal markings are hard to read in the daylight -- as well as for a rather conservative dashboard design and one of the smaller cargo holds in the group.
On the other hand, the CX-5 emerged as one of the value leaders in this pack. Its $27,840 base price folds in a lot of standard equipment, and its $29,455 as-tested total added basically one major option -- the Grand Touring Tech Package. It includes a nav system, adaptive HID headlights with auto leveling, car alarm, and advanced keyless entry system for $1,325, certainly one of the least expensive factory nav system packages on the market.
The stylish CX-5 figures is a dark horse in the compact crossover derby, handicapped by its rather tepid acceleration, the trade for high mpg. Even so, the Mazda provides a level of dynamic response and driver engagement that's tops. And that languid 0-to-60 progress can be improved by a tenth or three by opting for a slick-shifting 6-speed manual transmission, the only manual transmission option in this group.
The manual gearbox is offered only with the basic CX-5 Sport, but it enhances driver involvement and boosts highway fuel economy to 35 mpg. If fun-to-drive is important, the CX-5 is like your childhood pal who was always ready to play.
Second Place: 2013 Ford Escape SE
Like the CX-5, the Escape is brand new for 2013, and represents a dramatic change of direction. New foundations, adapted from the front-wheel drive Ford Focus. And a decidedly new look, slick and contemporary, replacing the blocky, truckish look of the previous generation.
Also like the CX-5, the Escape's new chassis was the starting point for a very agile dynamic profile -- prompt responses in quick maneuvers, good control of body motions. The electric power steering system isn't quite as informative and precise as the Mazda's, but the driver involvement and gratification is nevertheless a plus.
However, though it's similar in size -- toward the smaller end of the compact crossover scale -- and in its contemporary good looks, the Escape has a bigger menu of choices for prospective buyers than its Mazda contemporary. For example, it offers three 4-cylinder engine options, two of them turbocharged (EcoBoost): a 2.5-liter (168 horsepower, 170 lb-ft of torque, naturally aspirated), an EcoBoost 2.0-liter (240 horsepower, 270 lb-ft), and an EcoBoost 1.6-liter (178 horsepower, 184 lb-ft).
The 1.6-liter is new to the U.S. market, and powered our Escape tester. All three engines are paired with the same 6-speed automatic transmission, but 4-wheel drive is offered only with the turbocharged versions. Like most of our test fleet, this Escape was a front-driver. And like the Equinox, an Escape equipped with the most powerful engine option is rated to tow up to 3,500 pounds.
The 1.6 didn't get rave reviews from everyone involved -- there were comments about hints of turbo lag before the engine got into the sweet spot of its powerband, and a little too much noise when it was working hard. However, the 1.6 gets good EPA fuel economy numbers -- 23 mpg city/33 highway -- and delivered generally respectable performance measured against the other contestants in this derby.
And there's always the option of the EcoBoost 2.0-liter for power mongers.
Though the Escape ranks next-to-last in this group for interior volume -- only the CX-5 has less -- that volume embraces a very attractive interior, with sporty front seats that are a match for the Mazda's and snazzy instrument and control graphics that lend splashes of electronic color to the dashboard.
There's also a surprising amount of cargo capacity -- over 34 cubic feet behind the rear seatbacks and over 68 cubic feet with the rear seats folded down. However, that rearmost cargo hold compromises rear-seat legroom a bit, and the swoopy roofline limits rear headroom, especially when the Escape is equipped with the optional Panorama double power sunroof ($1,395), present on our test vehicle.
Like all new Fords coming along these days, the Escape's secondary controls included Sync infotainment and the updated version of the MyFord Touch system, augmented by voice command. Though improved, the latter still provoked some test crew grumbling about having to jab the electronic buttons more than once to achieve the desired result, as well as a little wistful wishing for a good old-fashioned rotary knob or two.
The Escape's passive safety features are on par with the times, including plenty of airbags (front, driver's knee, side and side-curtain), and Blind Spot Information System (BLIS), which flashes a light on the side mirror when another vehicle is nearby in a parallel lane.
Base pricing for a new Escape is competitive, but injudicious option-shopping can run the tally up quite rapidly. Our SE tester, second of four trim levels (S, SE, SEL, Titanium) carried a base price of $25,895. The moonroof added $1,395, navigation system another $1,570, and a perimeter alarm system tacked on $440, for an as-tested total of $29,345, a competitive price for an attractive vehicle.
The Escape is good to look at, entertaining to drive, and attractive within. There are caveats. Though braking performance seemed strong, there were reports of slightly mushy pedal feel. Curb weights are mystifyingly high for a relatively small crossover SUV -- over 3,500 pounds for this tester, according to Ford, more than 200 pounds heftier than the CX-5 -- and ride quality can be a little too stiff on patchy pavement.
But if the Escape gives something away to the Honda CR-V in terms of refinement, it's clearly a stronger rival than ever before.
Winner: 2012 Honda CR-V EX-L Navi
With the exception of 2011, when Japan's catastrophic earthquake and Thailand flooding choked production down to a trickle, the CR-V has been the bestseller in this class for years, and often the bestseller of all SUVs, great and small. Which raises the tricky question of what's next?
Honda essentially invented the segment in 1995 with the first-generation CR-V, and subsequent generations have kept the Civic-based crossover at the front of the pack.
Introduced last fall, Honda's response to the "what's next" challenge was conservative, even cautious. The wheelbase is unchanged at 103.1 inches -- shortest in this group -- while length and height shrink an inch, to 178.1 and 65.1, respectively.
This puts the CR-V at the small end of our test-SUV spectrum, but in typical Honda fashion its interior volume seems to belie the exterior dimensions. Basic cargo capacity -- the space behind the rear seats -- is substantial at 37 cubic feet, as is the space with the rear seats folded: 71 cubic feet. There's also plenty of passenger room, front and rear, and numerous nooks and cubbies for small-object storage, another typical Honda strong suit.
Passive safety features are top drawer -- five stars overall from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
But the interior element that immediately grabs eyeballs is the quality of the materials, the straightforward logic of the various controls, the supportive front bucket seats, and the excellent forward sightlines. Honda's old advertising tagline -- "we make it simple" -- is in evidence here. Acclimating oneself to this vehicle is as easy as getting in, starting the engine, and driving off.
Pricing makes the CR-V's many strengths even more appealing. The window sticker bottom line on our EX-L Navi tester (Honda counts navigation-equipped vehicles as separate trim levels) was $29,575. This includes pretty much everything in the CR-V inventory -- (inhale) leather upholstery and trim, navigation system with voice recognition and rear view camera, power moonroof, DVD entertainment system, heated front seats with driver-side power adjustability, Bluetooth connectivity with streaming audio, USB audio interface and Pandora connectivity, SMS text messaging, 328-watt 7-speaker premium audio, 17-inch aluminum alloy wheels (exhale).
A power rear liftgate would be a useful addition to the foregoing, as would a blind-spot warning system, a la Ford. And, of course, in real 4-season climates all-wheel drive is always welcome -- and available, for a price. But beyond that, it's hard to think of anything to add.
One of the reasons Honda is able to offer the new CR-V with attractive pricing can be found in the powertrain. The engineers have squeezed a little more thrust out of the 2.4-liter engine -- now with 185 horsepower and 163 lb-ft of torque -- but while other carmakers are embracing the efficiency of direct fuel injection, Honda has been resisting the cost.
Honda also resisted the trend to 6-speed automatic transmissions -- the CR-V retains the 5-speed automatic of the previous generation. However, this doesn't seem to extract much of a fuel economy penalty -- at 23 mpg city/31 highway the CR-V's EPA ratings are competitive.
Similarly, the Honda's straight-line performance stacks up well versus its 6-speed rivals: 0-to-60 mph takes about 8.5 seconds.
The Honda CR-V isn't as entertaining an SUV to drive as the Ford Escape or the Mazda CX-5. The suspension tuning is softer, the new electric power steering system is novocaine numb, conveying essentially no information to the driver, and the evolutionary styling update, with its bigger rear roof pillar, creates a good-sized rear quarter blind spot.
But the CR-V's blend of smooth ride, smooth power, competitive fuel economy, outstanding assembly quality, first rate materials, quiet operation, exceptional comfort, and excellent value story trump its few soft points. Just as it trumps the rest of this field.
Source;
http://www.kbb.com/car-news/all-the-latest/small-suvs-big-capabilities-20122013-compact-crossover-comparison/
No comments:
Post a Comment