So, fuel economy, luxury, sportiness, who will dominate in the crossover SUV market. My two big ones right now are the Audi Q5 and Mercedes GLK. Always been a huge Audi fan, and the Q5 is no exception, but i'll have to say, that GLK is pretty BA. What do you all think, or will the Cayenne Turbo and Range Rover still pull in all the buyers?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Battle of the small SUV's
- Thread starter silbeej
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think the new GLK is ugly, and I'm not a big fan of the volvo xc60. If I were to buy a small SUV, which I probably don't think I'd do, I'd go for the VW Tiguan.
Isn't the GLK still a big car? Personally I'd probably take a Hybrid Toyota Highlander, but that's probably because I can't justify spending more on a car considering I'm moving to a place where my commute will be four blocks 
What do you want from a "best small SUV"?
If you're considering price, then the Hyundai Tucson is an excellent value, although it looks a bit poo.
If you want fast, and there's no budget, then perhaps a Cayenne is good. I like Audi's and Nissan's models too.
I think the worst is the Honda CRV, but only because it's so ugly. As a small SUV, I'm sure it's a decent ride, but wow is that an ugly car.
If you're considering price, then the Hyundai Tucson is an excellent value, although it looks a bit poo.
If you want fast, and there's no budget, then perhaps a Cayenne is good. I like Audi's and Nissan's models too.
I think the worst is the Honda CRV, but only because it's so ugly. As a small SUV, I'm sure it's a decent ride, but wow is that an ugly car.
I also don't like that the CRV really increased in size. It's not a particularly small SUV anymore like the original.
The Cayenne is a small SUV? I thought it was about the same size as a Ford Explorer, not really small IMO.
The GLK looks nice, but gets terrible gas mileage; they should have developed a hybrid or put their BlueTec diesel engine in it.
If I were to choose a "small" SUV it would probably be the Ford Escape hybrid. Good gas mileage, looks decent, and can be nice inside if loaded.
The GLK looks nice, but gets terrible gas mileage; they should have developed a hybrid or put their BlueTec diesel engine in it.
If I were to choose a "small" SUV it would probably be the Ford Escape hybrid. Good gas mileage, looks decent, and can be nice inside if loaded.
This should be called the battle of the luxury SUV's, not the small ones. I came in to cast my vote for the Rav4, and felt like a pauper seeing the ones that were being compared.
Me neither. It also took a "me too" design, which makes it blend in with everything else. That, and nobody wants to buy a big "small car". That defeats the purpose. Everything that made that car unique is gone, although the front is uniquely ugly.
The new Subaru Forester is also a disappointment. It used to be a pretty cool looking car, even if it did look like a box. Making a more up-to-date box would have been better for Subaru, seeing as how they'll need to make unique cars to garner attention. If I wanted a small SUV hat looks and feels like every other small SUV, I'd look elsewhere.
Subaru just didn't realize that all they needed to do was update their box, since people are willing to buy boxes. Look at long-time boxy cars like the VW Golf. Even the designers of the new 2009 model (Euro model, US model is the same this year) said they were aiming to make something boxy and utilitarian while also showing people that boxy and simple can also be elegant and modern. That has always been their philosophy with regards to the Golf, no?
Audi Q5, just because anything out of Volkswagen AG kicks ass
LOL nice, but yeah, the cayenne, yukon, suburban, gl, toureg, etc, those are big SUV's, i'm talking about the crossover ones, which are the rav4, glk, q5, forester maybe..., etc.
None of the vehicles you listed are really considered "small" but I would choose an SRT-8 Jeep in a heartbeat
The new small SUV's have their place but their fuel economy still isn't fantastic.
In terms of putting the full size SUV's out of business, not going to happen. The GLK, Tiguan, etc are too small for some buyers and they can get a bigger model for not much more with only slightly worse fuel economy.
In terms of putting the Cayenne Turbo and Range Rover out of business, that won't happen either. the GLK starts at $34,000. The Range Rover and Cayenne Turbo cost more than twice that. They're in completely different leagues. There have always been small cheap SUVs and larger, more expensive ones, and there always will be.
The Range Rover is also a niche car that not a lot of people are going to buy anyways unless they really want one. They're extremely expensive, extremely unreliable, extremely expensive to fix, and depreciate extremely quickly (say 50% in 2 years, thats about $40,000 lost in thin air). Range Rovers have never really been known for sportiness or fuel economy either. The Range Rover sport handles pretty well but its still a 6000lb SUV. Anyone in the right mind would buy a Lexus LX570, Land Cruiser, or something that is actually reliable and holds its value well.
In terms of putting the full size SUV's out of business, not going to happen. The GLK, Tiguan, etc are too small for some buyers and they can get a bigger model for not much more with only slightly worse fuel economy.
In terms of putting the Cayenne Turbo and Range Rover out of business, that won't happen either. the GLK starts at $34,000. The Range Rover and Cayenne Turbo cost more than twice that. They're in completely different leagues. There have always been small cheap SUVs and larger, more expensive ones, and there always will be.
The Range Rover is also a niche car that not a lot of people are going to buy anyways unless they really want one. They're extremely expensive, extremely unreliable, extremely expensive to fix, and depreciate extremely quickly (say 50% in 2 years, thats about $40,000 lost in thin air). Range Rovers have never really been known for sportiness or fuel economy either. The Range Rover sport handles pretty well but its still a 6000lb SUV. Anyone in the right mind would buy a Lexus LX570, Land Cruiser, or something that is actually reliable and holds its value well.
My mom had an X3. It turned out to be a lemon. The only good thing I could say about it was excellent seats. The electronics were completely messed up on it as well as the engine. It had to go back. We replaced it with a Touareg which has been a reliability nightmare, thank god for warranties. We also have a Range Rover Sport 4.4 HSE that we got from the dealer as a demo car and got a great deal on. So far its been very good aside from the drivers door lock breaking and it getting a solid 14mpg for a while city/highway until all the 02 sensors were replaced.
If you want a small SUV that won't burn a hole in your wallet every time you fill up with gasoline, try either the Honda CR-V or the Toyota RAV4. It's likely Toyota will soon offer the RAV4 with the new 2.5-liter I-4 rated at around 169 bhp with a six-speed automatic, essentially the same drivetrain used on the upcoming 2010 Camry sedan.
I never got the whole SUV craze, overweight behemoth which I can't see behind/can't park in half the parking spaces. If someone gave me something like an escalade I would sell it.
If you're going to go with upscale small SUV, you can't beat the style and of this lean, mean posh English machine. *lust*
...or a BMW x5. and the ^^ Caddy looks sweet too.
...or a BMW x5. and the ^^ Caddy looks sweet too.
Most people can't afford to have a car that is not their daily driver and is only for "every now and then." So, they buy an SUV that they only use to its capacity every now and then. Its hard to chastize someone for purchasing an SUV when its used for its intended purpose at times, even it most often its driven solo. What do you do when you need the room of an SUV sometimes, but can't afford to own a smaller car in addition? You buy the SUV and drive it solo often, just to have the room in reserve when you need it.
That being said, I own a truck, and my family owns an SUV. After having ridden in numerous large and midsize luxury cars, I probably wouldn't buy another truck or SUV (unless it was small hybrid). There isn't much of a reason unless you have a large family or tow/fill the bed often. A good mid-sized car like an Accord, Camry, E350, 5 Series, etc, would fill most families needs in a more economical manner than an SUV. Yeah, you can't fit a ton in the trunk, but how often do most families fill their trunk? The people I know with smaller or midsize cars rarely have anything in there, yet they still wish they had all the room of the back of an SUV for that odd time they go out and buy a TV or table, its laughable.
There is a place for SUVs and trucks, but they definitely shouldn't have been as large of a percentage of the marketplace as they were. Most people all over the world manage without huge SUVs, why should the U.S. be any different?