From A:
We spent our Saturday test driving a variety of small SUVs. We're not sure when we will be purchasing a new car, but it will definitely be within the next year or two. It was a lot of fun to take a look at what's available and go for a spin. Here are our reviews on the cars we tested (all from my perspective - I'm sure J would have some different opinions about more technical specifications):
Honda CR-V
We don't really have a fair comparison of the CR-V since we didn't actually drive it. However, from checking one of these out in person, it doesn't seem to have a lot of cargo space. However, the salesman claimed that Honda uses higher-quality metal than other manufacturers, and this is apparently supposed to be a big selling feature - unless you're trying to sell to a materials engineer who knows this is a ridiculous claim.
Overall, we weren't too impressed with any particular feature of the CR-V. It's a pretty standard small SUV and the styling leaves a little to be desired. But just to be fair, we might need to take one of these out for a drive sometime soon.
Nissan Rogue
From a financial perspective, the Rogue has the most appealing price. It also has a sporty look to it. But after driving this vehicle we can see why it's less expensive than the alternatives. This car is cramped, both in the front seat with very little arm space and in the back seat with minimal foot space. It drove fine, but the visibility out the back is terrible. This is due to the combination of narrowing window sizes on the side of the car, a small back window, and a high back seat.
Ergonomically, the cargo area sits higher than the other models we looked at which makes loading and unloading easier on the lower back - but the cargo area is fairly small. Overall, we weren't too impressed.
Toyota RAV4
After looking at the CR-V and the Rogue, the RAV4 impressed us as soon as we saw it. The main reason for this, however, was that the dealer had a model with the Sport Appearance Package in stock, which makes this car look so much better.
The model we're used to seeing has the ugly tire storage on the back which necessitates an asymmetrical license plate and logo location:
The Sport Appearance Package gets rid of the tire storage and centers the logo and plate, creating a look that's more like a mini Highlander:
This car has a lot of "creature comforts" that were lacking in other comparable vehicles. It's very comfortable to drive, and is also comfortable for passengers, both in the front seat and the back seats. There is a lot of versatility for cargo space since the back seat is split into three sections for folding purposes, and the middle seat also doubles as an arm rest with cup holders. There is a quick release handle in the back of the car that allows you to fold down the back seats without having to walk around to the side of the car, and there's enough space for optional third-row seating.
We liked this vehicle, but also thought it was a fairly "trendy" option that may not look so good in a few years.
Subaru Forester
Admittedly, J and I are a little biased toward Subaru since both of our families have owned one. But that aside, the Forester is just a good vehicle all around. All wheel drive comes standard and it has good gas mileage. The cargo area is basically a big box, so you can fit a lot of boxes (and other stuff) inside of it. The car drives really well, taking corners like a sports car. And the visibility is better than any other car we looked at.
It doesn't have the sportiest styling of other vehicles in its class, but it doesn't look bad either. What we were most impressed by during the test drive was that the dealership has a dirt track across the street that they have you drive on. You do a quick stop on the dirt and then floor it - you also go through a few puddles. And the Forester handled the track extremely well.
The Forester seems like it's going to be the vehicle for us - whenever that ends up being.
