Compact CUV/SUV Comparo

[stpatrick90]

http://blog.caranddriver.com/2010-terrain-vs-cr-v-rav4-tiguan-mariner-outlander-forester-grand-vitara-comparison-tests/ Edited January 19, 2010 by stpatrick90

[stpatrick90]

http://blog.caranddriver.com/2010-terrain-vs-cr-v-rav4-tiguan-mariner-outlander-forester-grand-vitara-comparison-tests/

 

I am astonished that the Mariner performed so poorly in their testing. I just had a 2009 Ford Escape V6 AWD for a rental following having a RAV4 V6 for a rental the week before. The RAV4 was a bit quicker but road worse in my opinion and exhibitted worse road noise. However my biggest surprise comes from the handling performance of the Mariner because I can honestly without a doubt say the Escape I had as a rental was noticeably quicker through the corners! I mean there seemed to be a bit more body roll but it was much more resistant to plow wide and allowed me to carry the speed more. I do have to say something though...the Escape stability control system would intervene abruptly if you went anywhere near the brakes in a hard corner, especially compared to the RAV4's stability control system. However if you drive smoothly you go much quicker in the Escape.

[PREMiERdrum]

I am astonished that the Mariner performed so poorly in their testing. I just had a 2009 Ford Escape V6 AWD for a rental following having a RAV4 V6 for a rental the week before. The RAV4 was a bit quicker but road worse in my opinion and exhibitted worse road noise. However my biggest surprise comes from the handling performance of the Mariner because I can honestly without a doubt say the Escape I had as a rental was noticeably quicker through the corners! I mean there seemed to be a bit more body roll but it was much more resistant to plow wide and allowed me to carry the speed more. I do have to say something though...the Escape stability control system would intervene abruptly if you went anywhere near the brakes in a hard corner, especially compared to the RAV4's stability control system. However if you drive smoothly you go much quicker in the Escape.

 

Their testing criteria for these small SUVs were absurd. They tested them like they test everything else: As sportscars. When I saw that the Suzuki and Mitsubishi finished ahead of the Mariner (and after I was done laughing), I stopped taking these guys seriously.

[ANTAUS]

Their road testing criteria can only account for so much. I would say the Mariner has it's weak points, I mean, the platform is quite old and Ford has done a good job keeping it fresh but it can only do so much. I do feel the body is not as taught, brakes were mediocre, and the interior still needed more attention in regards to materials, but I would say its' interior was still ahead than Suzuki, Mitsu, and a few others.

[PREMiERdrum]

Their road testing criteria can only account for so much. I would say the Mariner has it's weak points, I mean, the platform is quite old and Ford has done a good job keeping it fresh but it can only do so much. I do feel the body is not as taught, brakes were mediocre, and the interior still needed more attention in regards to materials, but I would say its' interior was still ahead than Suzuki, Mitsu, and a few others.

 

I'll throw the CRV in the group of 'utes that lag far behind the Escape/Mariner. They're terribly slow, cramped, the interiors and cheap, and the cabin noise is awful. And they're ugly to boot!

[waymondospiff]

Their testing criteria for these small SUVs were absurd. They tested them like they test everything else: As sportscars. When I saw that the Suzuki and Mitsubishi finished ahead of the Mariner (and after I was done laughing), I stopped taking these guys seriously.

IIRC, the Escape/Tribute came in first in the first small SUV comparison test when they debuted back in 2001 (Competitors included the miserable first-gen Kia Sportage & the last year or so of the Jeep Cherokee.) Ever since then they (Tribute, Escape, Mariner) have dropped to the bottom in every comparison test C&D has done. I don't know if it's personal, but it's seems pretty clear that they don't like the CD2 triplets.

 

I'd say the CD2s aren't great, but the aren't the worst, either. But the fact that the 2006-vintage RAV4 is still ranked as #1 (which I agree with) says that no one has really put a compelling package together in this class. When's the next Escape/Kuga arrive?

[PREMiERdrum]

IIRC, the Escape/Tribute came in first in the first small SUV comparison test when they debuted back in 2001 (Competitors included the miserable first-gen Kia Sportage & the last year or so of the Jeep Cherokee.) Ever since then they (Tribute, Escape, Mariner) have dropped to the bottom in every comparison test C&D has done. I don't know if it's personal, but it's seems pretty clear that they don't like the CD2 triplets.

 

I remember that issue (in 2001 IIRC) very well. The Escape and Tribute tied for first place on the merits of cargo area, interior flexibility, comfort, and light off roading ability.

 

Fast forward to 2010, and the Mariner comes in last place based on "soft" handling and skidpad performance.

 

When's the next Escape/Kuga arrive?

I've heard either late this year as a MY2011 or early CY2011 as a MY2012.

[timmm55]

The Mariner/Escape aren't bad, just long in the tooth. The interiors are IMHO the weakest link (.......and the brakes)

[silvrsvt]

The interiors are IMHO the weakest link (.......and the brakes)

 

Whats wrong with the interior? While not quite up to the 2010 Taurus or 2011 Focus Standards, its nice and made with good quality plastics.

 

I've never experienced any issues with the brakes on it either.

 

Anyways, these reviews are just about useless, the SUV that came in last is first with the customers....thats all that matters.

[baggs32]

I'm not sure that the Mariner ranks last but I agree it should be pretty close to it. Our '08 Escape has a good bit of chassis flex going over rough roads and it isn't the most refined vehicle out there for sure.

 

What surprises me the most is how poorly the Terrain performed. This is GM's best effort? It barely beat a 9 year old design and a Mitsubishi? That can't be good.

[630land]

Car and Driver is irrelavent in the age of the internet. The days of using them as "gospel' are over. There are alot more sources of information online, such as Jalonik or Autoblog. Real world owners have more know how than the 'fun to drive' road testers.

[grbeck]

I doubt that Jalopnik or Autoblog would rank the Mariner any higher if it conducted this comparison test. The simple fact is that the Escape and Mariner are rather dated compared to the competition, and it shows.

 

The real worry here is the Terrain. It's a brand-new design, and it finished near the bottom. Not good. At least the Mariner is the oldest model in the test.

[timmm55]

Whats wrong with the interior? While not quite up to the 2010 Taurus or 2011 Focus Standards, its nice and made with good quality plastics.

 

I've never experienced any issues with the brakes on it either.

 

Anyways, these reviews are just about useless, the SUV that came in last is first with the customers....thats all that matters.

 

The interior just looks old with too much and the plastics.are too hard. A few years ago it would of been best in class.

 

handi­capped by overaggressive stability control—then went on to log the worst braking distance by quite a margin.

[silvrsvt]

I'm not sure that the Mariner ranks last but I agree it should be pretty close to it. Our '08 Escape has a good bit of chassis flex going over rough roads and it isn't the most refined vehicle out there for sure.

 

I'm not sure what the deal is...a co-worker has a 2005 Escape XLT and I was shocked at how bad it was vs my Friends 2010 Escape...the '10 model was a like a luxury car vs the 05 Model

 

 

The interior just looks old with too much and the plastics.are too hard. A few years ago it would of been best in class.

 

Have you even touched the plastics on it? They are the same plastics used in in the 2010 Fusion Hybird my bro-in-law has. I've been in a 2010 Escape Limited (sisters car) and Escape XLT (my friends car I've driven many times)...they are far better then what my Mustang has. Some people might like the busy button arrangement on the center stack, but its not nearly as bad as people make it out to be.

 

Like I said, I didn't have any problems with the brakes when driving it in a normal matter, not screaming down a test track and panic stopping it..

[73mach1]

"When we asked our voters which SUV they’d pick if they had to drive to L.A. tomorrow, two pointed fingers at the Mariner."

 

They gave it a "1" for amenities. What it didnt have A/C? No power windows?

Just for having Sync I think it deserved a "9"!

[LoveTaurus]

Just came back from exercise at the park, I saw a couple Escape/Mariner drove by. I believe Ford got the appearance right. They have the handsome, UTILITY look to them inside and out that the ELEMENTS are just RIGHT! In this group of comparison, none of them actually got these UTILITY look I am talking about. Either others are too girlie or they are overdone in the interior getting into the weird territory. For example, my 30's something female single cousin drives a Rav4, looks perfect for her. God! Not for a 30's something man, looking like man wear pantys.

 

Yes, has to agree with the comparison, plastic interior, slower, noisier, braking, etc put the ranking to the last place. But I believe that does not translate very much in the showroom. That doesn't means the performance of the Escape/Mariner BAD. I guess Ford might have done many survey with customers, they designed this UTILITY look, kind of like a mini Explorer, people want.

 

Recently went test driving a RAV4 with my in-law, he is looking for a small SUV. I was in the back seat while he drove. Men! BAD! I didn't like the body motions and noisy ride. I thought, it will never be my car :closedeyes:

Edited January 21, 2010 by LoveTaurus

[baggs32]

I'm not sure what the deal is...a co-worker has a 2005 Escape XLT and I was shocked at how bad it was vs my Friends 2010 Escape...the '10 model was a like a luxury car vs the 05 Model

 

I don't agree. We had an '02 XLT and an '05 Limited (we lease) and while those two were very similar inside and out they weren't any less refined or comfortable than our '08 Limited. In fact, the '02 had the gear shift on the column so it seemed more spacious than the other two. It was also quicker (remember we have an '08 and not an '09 or later) and a tad bit better on gas.

 

Don't get me wrong, the '08 looks better inside and out. But other than appearances changing, not much else has. Even the seats are basically the same or crying out loud. I'm sure the '10 is better in some ways mechanically but the Escape/Mariner just plain need redone now. It's time.

[Michael Reynolds]

I had a brand new Escape as a rental back in October, and I really wasn't impressed with the ride or steering. It hauls, but it just doesn't handle well. On top of that I wasn't all that impressed with the interior. Simple tweaks, that I'm sure Ford will be making sooner rather than later.

[WingBender]

Back when the first Escape came out, C&D loved the handling. Either the bar has been raised since then, or Ford has once again dumbed-down the suspension on one of their products to appease the Grosse Point matrons who have to drive over a few potholes on the way to the mall.

[Michael Reynolds]

Back when the first Escape came out, C&D loved the handling. Either the bar has been raised since then, or Ford has once again dumbed-down the suspension on one of their products to appease the Grosse Point matrons who have to drive over a few potholes on the way to the mall.

 

Chalk that up to Ford dumbing down the suspension, that and the flaccid tires that they put on these things to eek out as much fuel economy possible.

[focus05]

The Escape/Mariner are just old. They are average products in their class and won't be receiving any updates until their new models come out.

 

Couple points:

- The interior is weak. Not bad, just boring with poor sculpting on the dash and door moldings and average stack design. The seats are certainly nothing to write home about. The choice of colors in the cabin is... different.

- Powertrain is decent, but is facing strong competition (Equinox 2.4, Rav4 3.5); the V6 is particularly average due to NVH, even if it scoots.

- Handling is pretty poor. Honestly, most people won't notice. They will notice the ride, and Ford, knowing it can't make the platform handle like a Rav4 has tried to out ride it. And succeeded, I think.

- Braking is ok... the braking does not feel nearly as confident as my 2005 Focus w/o ABS.

- Overall refinement... it just doesn't have it. It's not an unrefined vehicle; there's just nothing that makes it particularly compelling, honestly.

 

The good thing is, we only have about 12-15 months left on this model before we get some new blood, at which point, Ford's small CUV entry will be much better. Expect sales to stay ok through Q2 and start to lose market share by EOY. But Ford only needs it to last about that long...

[PREMiERdrum]

- The interior is weak. Not bad, just boring with poor sculpting on the dash and door moldings and average stack design. The seats are certainly nothing to write home about. The choice of colors in the cabin is... different.

What? You can get black, tan, or "stone" which is a neutral grayish tan.

The stack trim is silver in XLT and Hybrid trim and piano black in Limited and "Sport" trim.

I'd say that the 08's use of brown dash and seat inserts on the black "premium" interior was weird, but there's nothing unusual about the color choices now. Not nearly as bizarre as the Fusion Sport's Red or Blue interior trims, or the Milan's marble-look seat cloth.

[jpd80]

You guys would cry if you saw the Aussie market, they try to sell the Asian Escape down here, the old 2.3 + 4-speed auto.

 

2009 Small SUV/CUV sales in Australia:

Subaru Forrester: 13,753

Toyota RAV4: 12,635

Hyundai Tuscon: 11,405

Nissan X-Trail: 7,875

Mitsubishi Outlander: 7,647

Honda CRV: 5, 103

VW Tiguan: 4,702

Mazda CX7: 4,422

Suzuki Grand Vitara: 4,190

Subaru Outback: 3,716

Nissan Dualis: 2,315

Kia Sportage: 1,911

Ford Escape: 1,039

[sullynd]

C&D online has lost all credibility RE: Ford IMHO ever since they wrote a biased article against Ford because (To quote one of the editors in comments) The blow-jobbery about Ford in the media.

 

Car and Driver prides itself on our editorial objectivity, and we stand by this post. I asked Mark to write this because everyone here who actually drives these cars can’t believe the constant blowjobbery around Ford in the popular media. And to the folks who think that we owe it to the American car industry to softball, I respectfully disagree. Our job is to keep all car companies on their toes.

 

Mike Dushane, Executive Online Editor

[baggs32]

Chalk that up to Ford dumbing down the suspension, that and the flaccid tires that they put on these things to eek out as much fuel economy possible.

 

Not so sure about that either. Our '08 handles every bit as well as our '02 and '05 did. Since '09 Ford has added an anti-roll bar to the rear suspension. Yes, the Escape went 8+ years without one and still did OK in the handling dept. I haven't driven one with the new bar but the rags say it handles much better. At least that's what they said when it first came out. I guess it doesn't stand out as much when compared to the competition which surely raised the bar, no pun intended.