My comparison: 2010 small SUVs

[FordBuyer]

I have nothing for or against him. I find his articles much the same as you do. Plus there's the typical auto journalist attitude of "I'm right because I said so." Plus 2, I feel used.......it's just a ploy to have us read their paper, a series yet? Come on, just get to it!

 

 

With all the positive PR Ford has gotten from the press and the public, leave it to import loving auto "journalists" to come on here and tell us that in their comparison tests the top selling Ecape is not even better than one of the worst vehicles Kia makes. A very dated Kia no less and worse looking bottom feeder, cheap econo looking, rental fleet looking one at that. The dated piece of crap even has a 4 speed auto and is only worth $20,000 because it's so decontented and most dated looking small ute on road. For me, it's like some auto journalist saying the Yugo is better than a Ford Focus with SYNC. I'm not even sure the Sportage shown by him is better than my 1985 Bronco ll which I used to own and bought new. I hauled a trailer up North with it and drove it in Northern Michigan blizzards and never got stuck with traction lock on both axles.

[aneekr]

VW also seemed to think the moving from Troy, MI to New Jersey was somehow going to solve their problems here. It didn't happen.

VWoA actually moved its hq to Troy, Michigan from New Jersey in the 1980s. In the early 1990s, they moved to a spiffy new facility on Hamlin Rd. in Auburn Hills, Michigan. Then in 2008, they moved again to an even spiffier hq, this time in Northern Virginia (Washington DC Metropolitan area). Presumably they made the latter move because the Tiguan is more popular in the DC area than in Metro Detroit.

 

But you're right FordBuyer- relocating headquarters offices doesn't seem to be an effective solution to VWoA's problems. Maybe their sponsorship of DC's MLS team will do the trick?

Edited May 18, 2010 by aneekr

[V8-X]

The suspense is killing me!!! Who's gonna be #1???

 

Really, I could care less. I found in the first four place items to be so individually subjective and base on a unique opinion, that the end result of who is #1 doesn't matter. I'm not an Escape fan, but must agree when comparing the Sportage to the Escape, there is no way the Escape comes out on the bottom end, even factoring the cost difference. And from experience with the Escape (Aunt owned an '02 and now an '09 - totaled the '02 in an accident), the two are night and day difference in both style/looks and performance/ride/feel.

 

Nothing against DC. I've never been in or around a Tiguan (sp?), so I can't speak to them. But I've been around a few Escapes and Sportage's and simply can't agree with the outcome. The CR-V is decently good, but nothing surprisingly better than the Escape in my opinion. Then again, the last CR-V I experienced was the '08 model and I'm unsure how much the changes make a difference.

Edited May 18, 2010 by V8-X

[silvrsvt]

The CR-V is decently good, but nothing surprisingly better than the Escape in my opinion. Then again, the last CR-V I experienced was the '08 model and I'm unsure how much the changes make a difference.

 

 

I think thats the biggest issue here...is that the gap between really bad and really good is really really narrow and its hard to go wrong with one of the vehicles, outside of one or two on the bottom end.

 

Its all subjective....and peoples options are formed by things that are said by other reviewers.

 

 

[RichardJensen]

DC gets paid by the click. You get the articles in drips and drabs because it maximizes his revenue.

 

It doesn't necessarily make him a better writer (in fact, I'd argue it makes him a worse writer), but that's why the results are spread out over a week or more.

 

And I'm willing to let him continue posting here to promote his articles because he gets such a small amount of money from us and a significant amount of grief to go along with it.

 

Nonetheless, I hope that the back and forth here will sharpen his logic and techniques, and firm up the sometimes soggy arguments he uses.

 

---

 

IMO an ideal 'car review' should not pick winners and losers, nor should it engage in ill-conceived hyperbole. It should provide a comparative analysis, and leave the decision to the reader. You might close the article by saying,

 

Overall, I preferred the Belchfire Eight. I enjoyed the balance between ride quality and sporty handling, and it offers a nice range of optional equipment for the price.

 

but that's about as far as I'd go. If you're going to insert your opinion, make sure you clearly identify it as such, and make sure that you clearly explain the basis for it.

 

If you can't tell the difference between opinions and facts, or you can't explain the basis for your opinions, you have no business writing.

 

Ultimately, I think these comparison tests, as currently conducted, display a pretty remarkable level of arrogance. Auto journalists may know more about cars than their readers, but that does not qualify them to dictate the needs and preferences of their readers.

Edited May 18, 2010 by RichardJensen

[DC Car Examiner]

With all the positive PR Ford has gotten from the press and the public, leave it to import loving auto "journalists" to come on here and tell us that in their comparison tests the top selling Ecape is not even better than one of the worst vehicles Kia makes. A very dated Kia no less and worse looking bottom feeder, cheap econo looking, rental fleet looking one at that. The dated piece of crap even has a 4 speed auto and is only worth $20,000 because it's so decontented and most dated looking small ute on road. For me, it's like some auto journalist saying the Yugo is better than a Ford Focus with SYNC. I'm not even sure the Sportage shown by him is better than my 1985 Bronco ll which I used to own and bought new. I hauled a trailer up North with it and drove it in Northern Michigan blizzards and never got stuck with traction lock on both axles.

 

If the two were the same price, I'd pick the Escape. But at $3,500 more, I would not.

 

And I would hope that a truck-based SUV can out-tow a car.

[DC Car Examiner]

I have nothing against DC...he seems like nice guy. But his comparison tests and rankings are too subjective for me. It's more about his feelings than hard performance data, road noise as in decibels, residual values, quality ratings, and so on. His rankings thus are meaningless. He would be better off just stating which one's he thinks are class competitive and which are not. Just not enough factual data presented to do anything more.

 

A car is not a collection of numbers, and attempts to judge them that way fail miserably.

[DC Car Examiner]

DC gets paid by the click. You get the articles in drips and drabs because it maximizes his revenue.

 

It doesn't necessarily make him a better writer (in fact, I'd argue it makes him a worse writer), but that's why the results are spread out over a week or more.

 

And I'm willing to let him continue posting here to promote his articles because he gets such a small amount of money from us and a significant amount of grief to go along with it.

 

Nonetheless, I hope that the back and forth here will sharpen his logic and techniques, and firm up the sometimes soggy arguments he uses.

 

---

 

IMO an ideal 'car review' should not pick winners and losers, nor should it engage in ill-conceived hyperbole. It should provide a comparative analysis, and leave the decision to the reader. You might close the article by saying,

 

 

 

but that's about as far as I'd go. If you're going to insert your opinion, make sure you clearly identify it as such, and make sure that you clearly explain the basis for it.

 

If you can't tell the difference between opinions and facts, or you can't explain the basis for your opinions, you have no business writing.

 

Ultimately, I think these comparison tests, as currently conducted, display a pretty remarkable level of arrogance. Auto journalists may know more about cars than their readers, but that does not qualify them to dictate the needs and preferences of their readers.

 

On the contrary, I don't like reviews that don't pick a winner and a loser. I find them wishy-washy laziness, refusing to say something bad about anything. A well-explained ranking gives enough information for a reader to make his or her own decision while forcing the reviewer to clearly state that some cars are not as good as other ones.

 

And no, the articles do not come out on different days for pay reasons. That would be the same regardless of when they were posted. It's in the theory that putting a lot of information out at once makes people more likely to skim than read.

[akirby]

while forcing the reviewer to clearly state that some cars are not as good as other ones.

 

But that's the problem - what makes one car "good" or "bad" to you might be just the opposite for others. To try and pick a "winner" in anything except a very specific objective category (0-60 e.g.) is worthless. What is important is why the reviewer liked or disliked a particular vehicle or feature and that simply requires detailed analysis, not some subjective biased ranking (not picking on you here - EVERYBODY is biased when reviewing a car).

[RichardJensen]

On the contrary, I don't like reviews that don't pick a winner and a loser. I find them wishy-washy laziness, refusing to say something bad about anything.

Where did I say you shouldn't criticize a car?

 

Go back. Read what I posted again.

 

Tell me exactly where I said you shouldn't criticize a car.

 

---

 

You should fairly represent the strengths and weaknesses of each car, without being so presumptuous as to assume that your value judgments are the same as (or superior to) your readers'.

[aneekr]

Cargo room, visibility, transmission (more importantly, what results from the transmission) and steering are indeed important to me...

Speaking of transmission, did you find the 6-speed transmissions in the Escape and Equinox to perform smoothly and responsively? A lot of other reviewers have complained about occasionally harsh upshifts and (especially in the Equinox) really languid downshift response with these transmissions. In the Equinox enabling the 'ECO' mode makes it even worse.

 

The Ford 6F/GM 6T transmission IMO is a perfect example of why additional forward gear ratios doesn't necessarily mean a better driving experience.

[V8-X]

If the two were the same price, I'd pick the Escape. But at $3,500 more, I would not.

 

And I would hope that a truck-based SUV can out-tow a car.

For $3500 though, what options are included in the Escape but not the Sportage? And vice versa? What was the fit/finish difference between the two? How about quality of material used? What type of resale or trade in value difference would you receive for each if each had similar mileage and in similar condition?

 

Just because one will save you $3500, doesn't mean you are getting comparable features or quality.

[FordBuyer]

For $3500 though, what options are included in the Escape but not the Sportage? And vice versa? What was the fit/finish difference between the two? How about quality of material used? What type of resale or trade in value difference would you receive for each if each had similar mileage and in similar condition?

 

Just because one will save you $3500, doesn't mean you are getting comparable features or quality.

 

 

The Sportage is a 90's era vehicle with its 4 speed auto and dated looks that are not class competitive. And no SYNC or even anything close to it. And residual values on Kia are not even close to the residual value on an Escape. But DC doesn't include residual values in his analysis/ranking. Only initial price as if the buyer will never trade it in or sell it outright. That is major flaw in his rankings.

[timmm55]

Just for comparison:

 

http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/rankings/Affordable-Compact-SUVs/

 

Everyone has an opinion, just like belly buttons (and other things)...........still doesn't make it a fact.

[92merc]

Just for comparison:

 

http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/rankings/Affordable-Compact-SUVs/

 

Everyone has an opinion, just like belly buttons (and other things)...........still doesn't make it a fact.

Well that site doesn't make a lot of sense either. Escape Hybrid does better for interior rating than the Escape? About the only thing I could possible see there is that the hybrid is quieter. But then the state NA for exterior. But they have it available for Mariner? But Mariner performance is lower than Escape performance, even though they use the same engines? WTF all the way around here....

[akirby]

Well that site doesn't make a lot of sense either. Escape Hybrid does better for interior rating than the Escape? About the only thing I could possible see there is that the hybrid is quieter. But then the state NA for exterior. But they have it available for Mariner? But Mariner performance is lower than Escape performance, even though they use the same engines? WTF all the way around here....

 

Gauges are totally different in the hybrid. I agree on the other points.

[aneekr]

Well that site doesn't make a lot of sense either. Escape Hybrid does better for interior rating than the Escape? About the only thing I could possible see there is that the hybrid is quieter. But then the state NA for exterior. But they have it available for Mariner? But Mariner performance is lower than Escape performance, even though they use the same engines? WTF all the way around here....

Well, this is the same publication that is infamous for "ranking" universities and hospitals as well. Maybe they should start ranking religions. Hey, whatever it takes to bring in ad revenue!

Edited May 19, 2010 by aneekr

[aneekr]

Incidentally, in the U.S. News rankings, the J.D. Power & Associates data from which the 'reliability' ratings are derived doesn't make sense either...

Edited May 19, 2010 by aneekr

[timmm55]

Gauges are totally different in the hybrid. I agree on the other points.

 

 

This only points out some of the absurdities of automotive journalism. The USNews "review" is a compilation of other reviews.

[Kev-Mo]

Toyota made a tradeoff with the RAV4: more interior cargo space in exchange for the diminished practicality of the swing-out back hatch. I'm guessing this will be the last generation of RAV4 to do that, but it's not a fault so egregious that it should automatically disqualify a vehicle for everyone. For some, it no doubt will -- I was just the other day warning a city resident looking for a small SUV about how swing-out cargo doors can be problematic in tight quarters. But for others, it's just not that big of a deal.

 

 

"Toyota made a trade off..." Yeah, right.. More like: Toyota can' figure this out even though all the other top tier players have got this right. (Deal breaker!)

 

They can't figure out how to get the exhaust to run cleanly through the underbody and suspension either - again, after some of the others have shown it can be done right. (Deal breaker!)

 

Make all the excuses you want DC, but simply put: This is very sloppy engineering.

Edited May 19, 2010 by Kev-Mo

[V8-X]

Just for comparison:

 

http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/rankings/Affordable-Compact-SUVs/

 

Everyone has an opinion, just like belly buttons (and other things)...........still doesn't make it a fact.

Wow, Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep is really bringing up the rear!

 

For some reason, this doesn't surprise me.

[FordBuyer]

Wow, Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep is really bringing up the rear!

 

For some reason, this doesn't surprise me.

 

Compared to DC, I would say those rankings for the most part are accurate. More valid since they averaged many reviews of the small utes in question. And just as I thought, the Escape is mid pack. What it means for Ford is that within 12-18 months, Ford needs a new Escape. I would imagine Ford will be showing the next generation Escape at this upcoming auto show season. Next year, the Escape will be at the bottom of rankings if no replacement is at dealers, but not this year. I would expect to see present Escape sales start to wane as year progresses unless Ford starts offering increasing incentives or maybe not if GM can't produce more Equinoxes and Terrains. The small sport ute is a growth market and getting more competitive every year.

[silvrsvt]

Compared to DC, I would say those rankings for the most part are accurate. More valid since they averaged many reviews of the small utes in question. And just as I thought, the Escape is mid pack. What it means for Ford is that within 12-18 months, Ford needs a new Escape. I would imagine Ford will be showing the next generation Escape at this upcoming auto show season. Next year, the Escape will be at the bottom of rankings if no replacement is at dealers, but not this year. I would expect to see present Escape sales start to wane as year progresses unless Ford starts offering increasing incentives or maybe not if GM can't produce more Equinoxes and Terrains. The small sport ute is a growth market and getting more competitive every year.

 

The thing is that the Equinox and Terrain are nearly the size of a mid-sized SUV. I saw one next to a Pre 02 Explorer and they where virtually the same size! The Edge slots up against them MUCH better vs the Escape.

 

As for the Escape...its going to be interesting what they do with it. The Kuga is going to be the basis, and I wonder if they are planning on a completely different tophat for the Escape vs the Kuga. I'd venture to guess that the new Escape is going to be V6-less also.

[DC Car Examiner]

For $3500 though, what options are included in the Escape but not the Sportage? And vice versa? What was the fit/finish difference between the two? How about quality of material used? What type of resale or trade in value difference would you receive for each if each had similar mileage and in similar condition?

 

Just because one will save you $3500, doesn't mean you are getting comparable features or quality.

 

The Escape has a few more features, including SYNC. They're equipped as comparably as possible, so there is nothing near $3,500 worth of extra content. Neither has great materials quality or fit/finish; they're comparable. Resale value is equal per ALG.

 

Where did I say you shouldn't criticize a car?

 

Go back. Read what I posted again.

 

Tell me exactly where I said you shouldn't criticize a car.

 

---

 

You should fairly represent the strengths and weaknesses of each car, without being so presumptuous as to assume that your value judgments are the same as (or superior to) your readers'.

 

There needs to be a yea or nay conclusion. That sort of review typically ends up saying what's good and what's bad yet concluding positively, under the theory that it's "arrogant" to say that a car isn't good.

 

But that's the problem - what makes one car "good" or "bad" to you might be just the opposite for others. To try and pick a "winner" in anything except a very specific objective category (0-60 e.g.) is worthless. What is important is why the reviewer liked or disliked a particular vehicle or feature and that simply requires detailed analysis, not some subjective biased ranking (not picking on you here - EVERYBODY is biased when reviewing a car).

 

Well, I give it a detailed analysis, and then explain why I picked what I did. There is just no other useful way to do it. To base a review only on "objective" numerical categories is unhelpful and often misleading; to use your 0-60 example, it rarely matters whether a car is a few tenths faster in a dead sprint if it feels slower.

[FordBuyer]

numerical categories is unhelpful and often misleading; to use your 0-60 example, it rarely matters whether a car is a few tenths faster in a dead sprint if it feels slower. DC

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Huh? That is your trouble....you go by biased "feelings." You are sounding like many of CR's short reviews which seem to concentrate on subjective feelings. I knew you would put the Escape near the end of the line before you posted it. The V6 Escape would blow the V6 Sportage away. Even the I4 Escape has 171hp and is peppy enough. The 6 speed auto alone is worth an extra $1,000 of added content and the Sync another $500. And no way are the residual values the same. Kia residual values suck. Cheap vehicles with high incentives equal bad residual values. The 20,000 who buy the Escape every month see value and put up their hard earned money knowing this. How come you don't? How many Sportages sell in a month? How come they don't see the value you do? Most auto buyers check out used vehicle prices on lots around them and know the value of used Sportages and used Escapes. They see 2008 Escapes selling for $20,000 and used 2008 Sportages going for under $15,000 if that. And they see how used Sportages don't hold up well because they are cheaper in more than price.