Rav4 vs Forester

[ndfergy]

If I was keeping a car beyond 5 years then long term durability would be a strong consideration, i.e. cvt. However, since I normally don't, Subaru's & Toyota's have a good enough reputation that performance and ergonomics rule the day. I think the box on box design of the Subie with it's greater glass area might be the favourable deciding factor.

Having said that:

I live within the Niagara Escarpment region with many steep hills and gullies that, according to the marketing guru's, would make me the poster child for the necessity of 4wd. Guess what? A 2wd vehicle equipped with good snow tires has served me well in many severe conditions. Remember, traction trumps driveline choice. 4wd only trumps 2wd after that condition is met. Therefore, on that driveway and conditions one of posters displayed, I would take my Yaris equipped with my Gislaved Nordfrost 100's over his 4wd AST any day of the week. It's only when the snow is deeper do the tables turn but that's more a function of ground clearance.

It's funny, CR did a study of 4wd owners and only 15% swapped out their AST for winters. They'd be better off financially buying a 2wd version and equipping it with snows. SMH

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Quote
It may, but it wont do it on a nice day. I can push a car down that gravel hill hy hand with you in it standing on the brakes.

Either you need to lay off steroids or brakes need to be checked

In Colorado that is called: plain field, and we do have cars with FWD, and ice too.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by ndfergy
If I was keeping a car beyond 5 years then long term durability would be a strong consideration, i.e. cvt. However, since I normally don't, Subaru's & Toyota's have a good enough reputation that performance and ergonomics rule the day. I think the box on box design of the Subie with it's greater glass area might be the favourable deciding factor.

Having said that:

I live within the Niagara Escarpment region with many steep hills and gullies that, according to the marketing guru's, would make me the poster child for the necessity of 4wd. Guess what? A 2wd vehicle equipped with good snow tires has served me well in many severe conditions. Remember, traction trumps driveline choice. 4wd only trumps 2wd after that condition is met. Therefore, on that driveway and conditions one of posters displayed, I would take my Yaris equipped with my Gislaved Nordfrost 100's over his 4wd AST any day of the week. It's only when the snow is deeper do the tables turn but that's more a function of ground clearance.

It's funny, CR did a study of 4wd owners and only 15% swapped out their AST for winters. They'd be better off financially buying a 2wd version and equipping it with snows. SMH

Your Yaris would rut my driveway up and you'd be raking it back out for me when you spun your tires off half-way up it. Further, since performance and ergonomics rule the day, you'd be missing out if you didn't check out the CX5 Grand Touring Reserve and Signature, in that price-bracket. It would stomp a mudhole in the RAV4 and CRV and Forester.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
Quote
It may, but it wont do it on a nice day. I can push a car down that gravel hill hy hand with you in it standing on the brakes.

Either you need to lay off steroids or brakes need to be checked

In Colorado that is called: plain field, and we do have cars with FWD, and ice too.



So, how steep is it? Did you ever measure grade?
That does not tell anything.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
Quote
It may, but it wont do it on a nice day. I can push a car down that gravel hill hy hand with you in it standing on the brakes.

Either you need to lay off steroids or brakes need to be checked

In Colorado that is called: plain field, and we do have cars with FWD, and ice too.



So, how steep is it? Did you ever measure grade?
That does not tell anything.

Yes, as posted, it is a 27% grade. I'm telling you the facts, man. My girlfriend's Honda Pilot will just sit and spin in the gravel trying to go up it (FWD), several RWD vehicles have failed without monstrous running starts (An F150 and a Chevy 2500). Every FWD vehicle (Honda Odyssey, numerous friends who have visited) has failed without a good running start (mind you, it's over 300ft of driveway section that's sloped at that grade...)

 

[edyvw]

Quote
Yes, as posted, it is a 27% grade. I'm telling you the facts, man. My girlfriend's Honda Pilot will just sit and spin in the gravel trying to go up it (FWD), several RWD vehicles have failed without monstrous running starts (An F150 and a Chevy 2500). Every FWD vehicle (Honda Odyssey, numerous friends who have visited) has failed without a good running start (mind you, it's over 300ft of driveway section that's sloped at that grade...)

Honda Pilot has huge torque steer, as well as Odyssey. Not really the best vehicles in snow even with snow tires (there is a reason why I got Toyota Sienna AWD although I always have snow tires. It is POS suspension that these appliance vehicles have).
Pick Up trucks with such light rear end only RWD, will have issue on less steeper grade.
27% for good FWD with snows is doable, unless driver stops in the middle of the run.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Quote
Yes, as posted, it is a 27% grade. I'm telling you the facts, man. My girlfriend's Honda Pilot will just sit and spin in the gravel trying to go up it (FWD), several RWD vehicles have failed without monstrous running starts (An F150 and a Chevy 2500). Every FWD vehicle (Honda Odyssey, numerous friends who have visited) has failed without a good running start (mind you, it's over 300ft of driveway section that's sloped at that grade...)

Honda Pilot has huge torque steer, as well as Odyssey. Not really the best vehicles in snow even with snow tires (there is a reason why I got Toyota Sienna AWD although I always have snow tires. It is POS suspension that these appliance vehicles have).
Pick Up trucks with such light rear end only RWD, will have issue on less steeper grade.
27% for good FWD with snows is doable, unless driver stops in the middle of the run.

Not even talking about snow. I mean on 100 degree summer days. Tires wont do a thing. Its loose gravel. Good luck.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
Quote
Yes, as posted, it is a 27% grade. I'm telling you the facts, man. My girlfriend's Honda Pilot will just sit and spin in the gravel trying to go up it (FWD), several RWD vehicles have failed without monstrous running starts (An F150 and a Chevy 2500). Every FWD vehicle (Honda Odyssey, numerous friends who have visited) has failed without a good running start (mind you, it's over 300ft of driveway section that's sloped at that grade...)

Honda Pilot has huge torque steer, as well as Odyssey. Not really the best vehicles in snow even with snow tires (there is a reason why I got Toyota Sienna AWD although I always have snow tires. It is POS suspension that these appliance vehicles have).
Pick Up trucks with such light rear end only RWD, will have issue on less steeper grade.
27% for good FWD with snows is doable, unless driver stops in the middle of the run.

Not even talking about snow. I mean on 100 degree summer days. Tires wont do a thing.

Oh well, I know how 27% looks and feels like. But, whatever, maybe they should change their vehicles.
I remember indy mechanic I knew had a garage with some 30% grade from main road. Most cars he was fixing were FWD. And there was no gravel to help with traction, nor there was enough space to gain some meaningful momentum.

 

[Toros]

If you want to spend $1600 at 100k for head gasket replacement, get the Forester. Fact.

 

[Al]

We know one thing. Everyone on here knows they can drive better than every other person.

Back in the day I drove up Mt. Washington in 2 ft. of unplowed snow. on my '69 Camaro with studded tires and 200 lbs of sand in the trunk....Ok beat that one. If you can. I have others.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
Quote
Yes, as posted, it is a 27% grade. I'm telling you the facts, man. My girlfriend's Honda Pilot will just sit and spin in the gravel trying to go up it (FWD), several RWD vehicles have failed without monstrous running starts (An F150 and a Chevy 2500). Every FWD vehicle (Honda Odyssey, numerous friends who have visited) has failed without a good running start (mind you, it's over 300ft of driveway section that's sloped at that grade...)

Honda Pilot has huge torque steer, as well as Odyssey. Not really the best vehicles in snow even with snow tires (there is a reason why I got Toyota Sienna AWD although I always have snow tires. It is POS suspension that these appliance vehicles have).
Pick Up trucks with such light rear end only RWD, will have issue on less steeper grade.
27% for good FWD with snows is doable, unless driver stops in the middle of the run.

Not even talking about snow. I mean on 100 degree summer days. Tires wont do a thing.

Oh well, I know how 27% looks and feels like. But, whatever, maybe they should change their vehicles.
I remember indy mechanic I knew had a garage with some 30% grade from main road. Most cars he was fixing were FWD. And there was no gravel to help with traction, nor there was enough space to gain some meaningful momentum.


Okay, you done lost me. What could your mechanic have possibly had that was worse than gravel for traction? Did he put marbles or ball bearings all over the drive or something, because that's about the only thing worse than loose gravel that I can think of aside from wet clay or something.

Could your mechanic have you sit in your car at the top of the grade and stand on the brakes while he pushed your car back down his drive? because I can...

 

[Bjornviken]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by edyvw
Quote
It may, but it wont do it on a nice day. I can push a car down that gravel hill hy hand with you in it standing on the brakes.

Either you need to lay off steroids or brakes need to be checked

In Colorado that is called: plain field, and we do have cars with FWD, and ice too.



So, how steep is it? Did you ever measure grade?
That does not tell anything.


Your kidding right? He moves the car with one hand when the e brake is on.

 

[garlicbreadman]

Originally Posted by fdcg27
Our newer Forester got hit in the rear about a month ago and is now undergoing repair.
Didn't look that bad and wife drove it home as well as for another couple of weeks.
I eyeballed it and told her four or five grand, which isn't much as collision repairs go and I was right since it came to a little over 5K.
Anyway, we of course made the offending driver's insurer pay for a comparable rental and wife has been driving a '19 Rav4 XLE for the past week.
We were doing a 200 mile highway trip today, so we took it.
Overall, a solid little piece that lacks the room, the ground clearance and the compliant ride of the Forester. The Rav found every little pavement imperfection and fed it to the passengers with full fidelity. Also a little noisier than the Forester but not really bad. Oh, and the Rav has only a tiny moonroof as compared to the Forester.
The seats are comfortable and acceleration is good, although not as good as Toyota's BHP allegation might lead one to believe. Fuel economy appears to equal that of the Forester, so pretty good.
The Forester interior is nothing really special, but that of the Rav looks as though it was stolen from an old GM design. The Rav also had orange peel as bad as any early eighties Chevy, so bad that I would personally have refused deliver of the car as a retail buyer. We also found the exterior design to be quite overwrought, but that's a matter of personal taste.
If you're shopping small CUVs, I'd encourage you to drive a Forester. You might just find it a better machine than a Rav or the very similar CRV.
Overall, I was not too impressed with the Rav, although it wasn't really bad. It just wasn't as good as I thought it might be.


I drove a 17 forester and it reminds me of a cheap 2000's american car. The interior quality is terrible, engine is horribly loud(and painfully slow) and has sloppy handling. I have a 19 crv and it is better is every aspect if you ask me. I do not live snowy area so AWD is irrelevant to me. I would also take a rav 4 over forester all day too.

 

[supton]

Originally Posted by Ws6

I'm going to disagree here: redo this test but with the car turned around. Those rear tires are unloaded due to the slope.

That said: it's steep, and over the years you've proven that you need AWD to tackle it. End of story.

Out where I live there are times of the year where ground clearance becomes critical--I could get around in my Jetta but at some point you just toss in the towel and get something "with a bit more". AWD isn't far behind it.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by supton
Originally Posted by Ws6

I'm going to disagree here: redo this test but with the car turned around. Those rear tires are unloaded due to the slope.

That said: it's steep, and over the years you've proven that you need AWD to tackle it. End of story.

Out where I live there are times of the year where ground clearance becomes critical--I could get around in my Jetta but at some point you just toss in the towel and get something "with a bit more". AWD isn't far behind it.

Pretty much. What some people don't understand is that I LIVE HERE. I don't want to do this running-start WOT spinning-tire-rutting-driveway [censored] every day. So I have an AWD vehicle that will calmly go up that drive at 5mph with zero drama. It's my daily life, not "I BET I CAN MAKE IT!" offroad park. So why not get AWD and be done with it? Made sense to me.

 

[Bjornviken]

Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by supton
Originally Posted by Ws6

I'm going to disagree here: redo this test but with the car turned around. Those rear tires are unloaded due to the slope.

That said: it's steep, and over the years you've proven that you need AWD to tackle it. End of story.

Out where I live there are times of the year where ground clearance becomes critical--I could get around in my Jetta but at some point you just toss in the towel and get something "with a bit more". AWD isn't far behind it.

Pretty much. What some people don't understand is that I LIVE HERE. I don't want to do this running-start WOT spinning-tire-rutting-driveway [censored] every day. So I have an AWD vehicle that will calmly go up that drive at 5mph with zero drama. It's my daily life, not "I BET I CAN MAKE IT!" offroad park. So why not get AWD and be done with it? Made sense to me.


I would do the same. 20 cm snow with ice under on that driveway with a fwd = nightmere

 

[edyvw]

Quote
Okay, you done lost me. What could your mechanic have possibly had that was worse than gravel for traction? Did he put marbles or ball bearings all over the drive or something, because that's about the only thing worse than loose gravel that I can think of aside from wet clay or something.

Could your mechanic have you sit in your car at the top of the grade and stand on the brakes while he pushed your car back down his drive? because I can...

It was muddy incline. Actually in winter he had a sign that said: do not come down if driving on summer tires or Hankook and Kumho snows.
It was 100ft climb, doable with FWD, same like yours is. But, for some people it is not, that is also true He had parking above, and some people just did not want to go down and going down in mud was also pretty challenging So he would just take care down.
You are forgetting that people all over the world drive in much worse conditions than 27% climb in gravel road. Is it challenging? Yeah, but it is perfectly doable. That is my point. Or, maybe crowed that visiting you just cannot negotiate that.

 

[edyvw]

Quote
Pretty much. What some people don't understand is that I LIVE HERE. I don't want to do this running-start WOT spinning-tire-rutting-driveway [censored] every day. So I have an AWD vehicle that will calmly go up that drive at 5mph with zero drama. It's my daily life, not "I BET I CAN MAKE IT!" offroad park. So why not get AWD and be done with it? Made sense to me.

That is different from discussion whether FWD can make it up or not. When you do 27% daily, yes, AWD and snow tires make a lot of sense. I personally could do FWD with snows in CO, but still AWD comes handy in certain situations, so why not. Is it absolutely necessary? No.

 

[fdcg27]

The RAV went back yesterday since Busam Subaru was done with the Forester.
The Forester came back with good, even panel gaps and good paint match, so all is well.
We did about 700 miles in the Toy and it kind of grew on me for the 300 miles that I drove it.
Ride isn't as good as that offered by the Forester, which has soft, long travel suspension, but not really that bad.
Noise level is higher and the many speed tranny sometimes seemed unable to settle on which gear to use, but overall the powertrain was pretty decent and fuel economy was very good. We put a total of only twenty two gallons in it, so certainly as good as the Forester if laughable as compared to our Accord Hybrid.
Looking around, you can also buy a RAV for thousands less than a Forester, so the RAV may be a compelling value, although we feel having driven both that the Forester was worth what we paid for it.
There were in this thread the usual uniformed comments about Subarus in general, to which I would respond that those posters should have a look at my sig.
We have two Foresters, both bought new, so we didn't exactly just fall off the turnip truck when it comes to the Subaru ownership experience. These are solid cars that hold up well.
Comparing a '17 Forester to an old American car is laughable, and I write that having owned and driven old American cars.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by fdcg27
The RAV went back yesterday since Busam Subaru was done with the Forester.
The Forester came back with good, even panel gaps and good paint match, so all is well.
We did about 700 miles in the Toy and it kind of grew on me for the 300 miles that I drove it.
Ride isn't as good as that offered by the Forester, which has soft, long travel suspension, but not really that bad.
Noise level is higher and the many speed tranny sometimes seemed unable to settle on which gear to use, but overall the powertrain was pretty decent and fuel economy was very good. We put a total of only twenty two gallons in it, so certainly as good as the Forester if laughable as compared to our Accord Hybrid.
Looking around, you can also buy a RAV for thousands less than a Forester, so the RAV may be a compelling value, although we feel having driven both that the Forester was worth what we paid for it.
There were in this thread the usual uniformed comments about Subarus in general, to which I would respond that those posters should have a look at my sig.
We have two Foresters, both bought new, so we didn't exactly just fall off the turnip truck when it comes to the Subaru ownership experience. These are solid cars that hold up well.
Comparing a '17 Forester to an old American car is laughable, and I write that having owned and driven old American cars.

I thought RAV4 is CVT?