The links for the slide show seem to be broken.

 

They're working for me -- what error message are you seeing?

 

Sixth place: Mitsubishi Outlander

When Mitsubishi grafted a new front end onto the understated Outlander for the 2010 model year, designers went with a brash look inspired by the automaker's high-performance Lancer Evolution. The Outlander has been sportier than the SUV norm since its introduction in 2007, and Mitsubishi elected to make that clearer at first glance.

Among these six tweener-utes, the Outlander stacks up well on paper: seating for seven, plenty of cargo space, competitive pricing and respectable fuel economy estimates. But while the brash new looks are backed up by sharp handling and a strong V6, the spec-sheet strengths quickly fall flat in an SUV that feels half-baked overall...

Continued at link:
http://www.examiner.com/cars-in-nat...tional/comparison-review-compact-midsize-tweener-ute-crossover-suvs-sixth-place

 

I am also not able to see the slideshow and because you didn't make reference to which 6 vehicles you are comparing I don't know whether or not I should check back.

I have "Access Denied. Error 403. You have attempted to access a file or directory to which there is no public access."

 

Okay, I've re-uploaded the slideshow and changed the link. Does it still not work? Does it make a difference if you click on the slideshow image on the left vs. the link at the bottom?

 

Still doesn't work for me. Neither link (side and bottom) work.

 

If the Ford Edge is in this comparo I think it really deserves to win (although I haven't driven all the vehicles which are comparable.)

This last weekend I had a brand new Edge from Budget Rent a Car which I cruised around Denver with. I was really surprised with how much I liked it. It had some odd features which I would probably get used to if I owned the vehicle. It had an excellent ride and it absorbed all the pot holes and road cracks I could find very well. The power of the V6 is awesome and the fuel mileage was quite acceptable. I managed about 21mpg in mostly city-type driving (mostly stop and go around downtown Denver with speeds typically under 45 mph.)

I really appreciate Budget giving me a free upgrade from a Chevy Impala to a Ford Edge. It was a great experience.

 

Lord. I can't imagine what's acting up. Hopefully I can get that resolved. Is the slideshow in the Outlander review working for you?

The six in the comparison are the Chevrolet Equinox, Dodge Journey, Hyundai Santa Fe, Kia Sorento, Mitsubishi Outlander and Toyota RAV4. I considered putting in the Edge as well, as it's a pretty direct competitor to the Equinox, but it lines up just about perfectly with decidedly-midsize vehicles like the Murano and Venza, and this needed to stay manageable.

 

Will be interesting to see how you find a way to cost the Equinox the win. Out of that list - its no contest.

 

The site's tech support says it's been resolved. Anyone who still has trouble seeing slideshows, please let me know.

 

Why was the CRV omitted, Brady?

 

It's definitely just compact, not between classes. No six-cylinder, not unusually large.

 

Fifth place: Hyundai Santa Fe

From a distance, the Hyundai Santa Fe comes across as the sort of car this reviewer tends to favor: an above-average vehicle at a below-average price. The Santa Fe's estimated out-the-door price of around $28,000 is the lowest of the six SUVs in this comparison, it has the most cargo room and the highest fuel economy ratings, and its clean design is functional yet not unattractive.

Up close, however, the 2007-era Santa Fe demonstrates too many flaws to be recommended at this price point...

Continued at link:
http://www.examiner.com/cars-in-nat...tional/comparison-review-compact-midsize-tweener-ute-crossover-suvs-fifth-place


I also posted a quick write-up on the base GLS model:
http://www.examiner.com/cars-in-nat...ars-in-national/a-week-the-2010-hyundai-santa-fe-limited-driving-the-base-model

 

Fourth place: Dodge Journey

When Chrysler introduced the Dodge Journey for the 2009 model year, the automaker was already on an upswing from the appallingly junky products it had introduced a few years before. The vehicle rode well and had a fairly nice interior, but was held down by squishy handling and brakes and poor fuel economy.

For 2011, the Journey was among a collection of vehicles to receive significant mid-cycle enhancements – this Dodge's being a redesigned interior, a new V6 engine, modified suspension tuning and modestly updated exterior styling.

The changes were enough to transform a generally unremarkable crossover into the luxury leader among this comparison's three-row vehicles, with its interior going from good to outstanding and its new engine being particularly smooth and quiet.

But enough flaws remain to hold it back to a mid-pack finish....

Continued at link:
http://www.examiner.com/cars-in-nat...ional/comparison-review-compact-midsize-tweener-ute-crossover-suvs-fourth-place

 

Third place: Chevrolet Equinox

Like the fourth-place Dodge Journey, the Chevrolet Equinox targets the luxury-seekers shopping in this market niche. With a high-style interior, splendidly cushy seats, and a smooth and quiet ride, it works to offer a big-vehicle experience in a more convenient, less-expensive package, to good effect. It also has stronger acceleration and more agility than the Dodge.

But someone looking more for a comfortable and practical family vehicle might be less impressed...

Continued at link:
http://www.examiner.com/cars-in-nat...tional/comparison-review-compact-midsize-tweener-ute-crossover-suvs-third-place

 

Third place: Chevrolet Equinox

Continued at link:
http://www.examiner.com/cars-in-nat...tional/comparison-review-compact-midsize-tweener-ute-crossover-suvs-third-place

It was robbed. How could Rav4 be better in any way!?

 

I would vote for the Rav myself. If nothing else having a third row seat available is HUGE in this class. For me, it would be a toss up between the Rav and the CR-V if I were in the market for a "cute-ute"..... Only because I myself don't need a third row. The 'Nox wouldn't even be on my list......

 

^ Let's face it, you just wouldn't be happy if the 'Nox didn't place first.

 

That's correct - in this field of vehicles, it's a straightforward conclusion.

 

Second place: Toyota RAV4

After the 2001 Suzuki XL-7 that pioneered this “tweener-ute” market niche, the Toyota RAV4 was the first competing SUV to follow its path when it was last redesigned for the 2006 model year. A longer version of RAV4s sold elsewhere in the world, the U.S. version promptly distinguished itself for its available third-row seat, spacious cargo hold, and impressive driving dynamics...

Continued at link:
http://www.examiner.com/cars-in-nat...ional/comparison-review-compact-midsize-tweener-ute-crossover-suvs-second-place

 

Personally, the Rav, despite being a little long in the tooth now, would have won this comparo. But, I for the most part agree with your finding Brady. And, it would seem so does the majority of the buying public.

 

The Rav 4's only real strength lies in it's optional V6 which doesn't make up very many sales and the third rear seat. In most other areas including seat comfort, the base 4 cylinder tied to the old 4 speed automatic, the clumsy designed rear hatch that should open up in addition to the side, a rather cheap interior and soggy handling and steering, the Rav 4 shows it's age. My boss has a 2009 Limited and said she would never buy another. It rides like a truck, is rather gutless on anything but a straight line, it's seat grow uncomfortable over time and the rear car door like hatch is a pain in the but if you forget to park behind someone in the parking lot. The momment a car or truck is behind you and close you have to pull out in order to get the door open. I do agree on the Equinox placing however but I think it does those things better such as the seat comfort, driving dynamics and the superior rear hatch design. The biggest letdown is the engine as always and Toyota does have the better V6.

 

If I was in the market for a small SUV, I'd go for the RAV4. I like the styling, comfort, and the power from the V6. It should be getting a redesign this year, so hopefully they improve the 3rd row seating and the dash materials.

 

If I was in the market for a small SUV, I'd go for the RAV4. I like the styling, comfort, and the power from the V6. It should be getting a redesign this year, so hopefully they improve the 3rd row seating and the dash materials.

Personally, I think its the ugliest - with the CR-V close behind.

 

First place: Kia Sorento

Think of Kia, and what comes first to your mind? Most likely a dirt-cheap tin-can econobox, or, if you're familiar with the Korean automaker's most recent small cars, a pleasant dirt-cheap econobox.

Think again.

Since Kia added size and luxury to its Sorento early last year, and converted it from a truck-type SUV to a car-based crossover, it has been the brand's top seller. Some 55 percent more Americans bought Sorentos than compact Forte sedans in 2010, and this SUV outsold Kia's smallest and least-expensive model, the Rio, by more than fourfold.

That's not to say that the Sorento is either the biggest or the most luxurious of the six compact/midsize “tweener utes” in this comparison. And at around $30,000 out the door nicely equipped, despite the Kia stereotype, it's not the least expensive either.

But the Sorento is able to sell so strongly at a fairly high price point because it has the all-around sense of solidity that defies the brand stereotype...

Continued at link:
http://www.examiner.com/cars-in-nat...tional/comparison-review-compact-midsize-tweener-ute-crossover-suvs-first-place

 

Sometimes I wonder if you think along the lines of what the potential buyer for a class of car would want. Since 3rd row seating kept coming up, how easy would it be to install 5 child seats into it? And then how easy would it be to get them in and out? Cause that is all those vestigial seats in the back can handle, not an adult. And you need to be what, over 4 foot something or 100 lbs to not need the child seat, correct?

Seriously, if you need to fit 7, get a Traverse class or used Tahoe or something. Or don't have 5 hypothetical children.

And luxuries... If this is your spouse's daily driver, are you going to subject them to an "adequate" interior, in materials, layout and finish? Or does all that matter is how it performs in a slalom or cone test? From what I have seen, the Equinox's best attribute is that the interior is (perhaps was, have not seen the new Dodge) on a level of its own, and people have bought it for that alone. I have seen people simply walk away from the RAV, CRv and Kia before even driving, because the interiors don't even come close.

I am not saying the Equinox is perfect, but I interpreted your writing as though you were adding weight to characteristics which are not as important in this class.

 

I think it spelled out pretty clearly what the Sorento's third row is good for: additional passenger capacity when needed, so that someone who only occasionally needs to seat seven doesn't need to deal with the bulk and price of a Traverse or Tahoe 365 days a year.

About interiors, it's the Equinox's subjective styling -- not its materials or build quality -- that's a standout. The Sorento's quality matches it; it just doesn't look as fancy. But the Kia is more user-friendly, so it's a tradeoff rather than a decisive victory for either.

 

That's just it. When you take a step back - having driven / rented / borrowed / spent time in many of these vehicles - when I saw the list, it's not even close.

Spelled out clearly? It is good for nothing. The "occasional" use of an inadequately designed 3rd row seat that is useless. Rent a van then if your needs are that "occasional".

If it is opinion, subjective styling that is, then your "opinion" runs counter to what the majority of professionals have written and said. But hey, I guess that is where your "life long expertise of autos" comes into play. User friendliness is opinion. You comparison of quality is opinion.

Well, I thank you for your opinion. Now tell me where the "thumbs down" rating is at your website, to express my opinion.

You hit it - Brady has no life long experience of anything. He doesn't understand how a crappy third row is rarely used "in a pinch", what a lack of space behind a third row really means in real world terms, etc. That's why you don't see them in luxury midsize SUVs. Just econoboxes to provide more "value". Once you've had one - you won't get another.

He also doesn't understand that thigh support for a tall adult (him) is horrid for a child, who spend more time than anyone in a back seat of a midsize anything.

People do not choose between cars over 1 MPG combined rating. Weight is the penalty for quality and NVH. Interior space infringement is what results from high safety ratings, isolating insulation, etc. Triple insulated glass is heavy - but on a long trip you get out not feeling fatigued from noise.

Sliding rear seats do not allow an accurate expression of cargo capacity. But they are perfect for families with small children. Puts the child seat within reach of the driver, but then slides back to allow a third person to ride with the child seat, OR pop the seat out any you have a truly comfortable vehicle to take 4 adults on a trip. Also, third rows block range of a sliding middle seat, or prevent it all-together in this class.

Rear doors that open sideways are near criminal once you've had one - especially the one piece variety. The only reason they exist is to allow the spare to hang off the back so the ****ty third row has somewhere to fold.

In short, he is reviewing cars from the perspective of a cash-strapped college student. The problem is, they don't buy 30K anything, typically don't have children, and certainly don't have the perspective to critically evaluate anything across a spectrum of potential customers.

 

Cliff's Notes of the comparison -- how the six cars stack up in particular ways:

http://www.examiner.com/cars-in-nat...ional/comparison-review-compact-midsize-tweener-ute-crossover-suvs-introduction

 

The #1 thing we love about the Terrain is the fact we dont have to shove 7 people in it. Im sorry, Im not subjecting anyone/anything to a third row seat in a vehicle this "small". If we have 4 kids, we are just going to get a bigger vehicle. If we need to have 6 people in one car, we will just take two or rent a van.

The #2 thing we love is just how quiet the vehicle is. Its solid and makes an amazing road trip vehicle.

My wife also loves the integrated door sills into the door. She never complains about getting her pants wet/dirty when getting in and out of the vehicle. That is a feature that is always forgot about for some reason.

Plus, despite the 'Nox and Terrain being the same the rear doors make all the difference for my passengers. The actual door of the Terrain doesnt have that down swoop that takes away from headroom doing egress and ingress.

We drove pretty much everything in this comparo except the Sorento because it wasnt out yet and we choose the Terrain. Heated cloth seats swayed the wife while I loved the amazing amount of passenger room and the sliding rear seat so that people sitting behind my 6'6 frame could be comfortable.

 

A lot of the complaining I see about the Theta vehicles is the cargo room and the non-flat folding rear seat. I know our rear seat passengers enjoy the rear seat comfort rather than it can fold flat. Should GM add it? Sure, if they can keep the comfort. Ive been in far too many SUV/CUVs that are just down right pitiful to ride in for more than an hour and the Theta vehicles excel at that.

As for the cargo room, its more than enough for the majority of what a family will use it for. A stroller, groceries and other crap will easily fit in it. Just because the numbers show it to be small doesnt mean that its a pitiful excuse for cargo room.

 

YEH,

It is not a hypothetical, it's the DEMOGRAPHIC.

Try again.