• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Do I really need SUV/CUV?? Is a large car smarter??? ('12 Camry vs '12 Equinox/Rav4)

redgtxdi

redgtxdi

Diamond Member
So I went & drove last night.......

#1.) 2012 Camry L (Though I currently own an LE, I actually liked the simplicity of the L as there was no electric seat, just a quick grab of the slide-bar to move the seat back....no auto-climate so the thing blasts at you when you start it up, just turn the knob if you want it & don't if you don't)

#2.) 2012 Highlander (Kinda' truck-like for a Toyota & just nothing really special for getting to sit higher & a useless 3rd row of seat I could do without anyway)

#3.) 2012 Equinox (Hmmmm......wish it were a tiny bit bigger, but surprisingly comfortable inside & its length makes up for a lot. Rear seat room makes my Ford Explorer experience laughable. The backseat makes the Explorer's feel like a 1985 Honda civic)

#4.) 2012 Traverse (Well, it's nice & it's bigger but for the $45K sticker of the one I drove.....they can keep it! I saw a couple just barely at $37K trim but WOW THAT'S A LOT OF MONEY!!!)

Anyway........I'm at a loss. I think the Equinox was the most impressive for the money. (I probalby wouldn't even get an LTZ but it had every bell & whistle in the world on it & it was right at $30K. But I wonder if a $25K Camry wouldn't fit the bill.
 
These are totally different vehicles to shop. Why do you think you need more room than a sedan? You'll certainly pay more in gas and purchase price for something else...
 
Wow, just looked up the Equinox on USAA's car buying service (yeah, you can do better but it's not a bad place to start). The base model FWD Equinox is $21.7k, the LTZ with AWD is $28.9k. That's not bad.
 
Ya, the Equinox is definitely an unusual animal. When compared to the Ford Flex it is MUCH cheaper. It does better on gas than the Flex does w/ the turbocharged ecoboost 2.0 with a more conventional engine & it's enough, just not powerful.

I hadn't actually considered the Taurus til I considered the Camry. Though I suspect the equivalent Taurus would be more $$$ & get significantly less mpg due to the engines. And the 2012 Camry really is a roomy beast.

As to cross-shopping........consider that most sedans in the category are low 20's mpg city & low 30's mpg hwy. (cool). Not many SUV's accomplish that.......but the Equinox does. I'm tall so the higher ride height helps but my biggest reason would be cargo space. The Equinox does give more, though not a ton, than a regular trunk-sedan.

Did you know a Touareg STARTS at $42K. WTF?!?!?!?!?!?!?
 
Except the Venza is actually more waste than gain. It's questionably more vehicle than a Camry (especially against the 2012) and that's because the cargo space is marginally more than a trunk. The Venza is more about fashion than function & shoppin' for 19" tires ain't no peach either.
 
Jumpem said:
Outback. AWD, ground clearance, roomy interior, 30mpg.
Click to expand...

Except I'm a little leary of that rear set legroom. (37.8") I'll have to physically try it out as I don't trust ANY figures given anymore since the Explorer (39.7" my @$$) fiasco.

Case in point.....I went ahead & test drove a Taurus tonight. Fun car, but lots of space wasted! The front is like sitting in a bath tub. Your knees are restricted due to the door panel on the left & center console on the right & it just feels as though you're surrounded up to your chin in "surround". (keyword: intrusive)

The shoulder room is nice & there's ample headroom but once comfortable in the front seat, if you go to the back seat you wonder why such a large vehicle has such little rear legroom. (again, like the Explorer, though not as bad). The trunk is definitely big, I'll give it that but I think I'd take a 12 Camry first.
 
redgtxdi said:
The Venza is more about fashion than function & shoppin' for 19" tires ain't no peach either.
Click to expand...
That's a valid point. I'm checking costco's website to see what 20" tires cost (venza comes with either 19 or 20 depending on model). Blizzak winter tires $330 each. Whooooooaaaaaa!!!!!
The same tire on a Camry are less than half that. Stupid rim size price conspiracy.
 
Ya, Venza's a nice lookin ride but that's about as far as the appeal for me.

One thing I found on the Outback that just made me cringe was.......CVT tranny!! (eeek) I'm not a fan but I'll have to drive it & see.
 
redgtxdi said:
Ya, Venza's a nice lookin ride but that's about as far as the appeal for me.

One thing I found on the Outback that just made me cringe was.......CVT tranny!! (eeek) I'm not a fan but I'll have to drive it & see.
Click to expand...

The CVT is fantastic. I would never want a regular automatic transmission again. I really like being able to pick any RPM, and hold it the entire time I am accelerating. It is also perfectly smooth. And it has paddle shifters that I use for compression braking.
 
OK, test drove 2 different Outbacks today. The 6 cylinder w/ the conventional automatic transmission (sweet) and the 4 cylinder w/ the CVT. Definitely feels weird & I don't think I like the CVT but it's almost one of those things where I'd have to drive it for a good week or so to get used to it. I don't know that a 10 minute test drive prepares someone for long-term relationship with something like a CVT.

Also, the 4-cylinder I drove had a weird issue where it kept thinking my door was open & would put that on the dash/screen & keep turning the dome lights on. Guy finally admitted that it was a glitch as my door was definitely shut. One of those things that makes ya go, "Hmmm.....do I really want to buy a non big-3 car?"

Otherwise good vehicle, though I think my next test should probably be an Equinox and Outback as close to back-to-back as possible. My mind says Equinox at the moment but we'll see.
 
😕 So far you haven't even told us what your needs are. How the hell could we possibly recommend a car for you?

My recommendation: Get the one with the biggest TV. That's what really matters.
 
redgtxdi said:
OK, test drove 2 different Outbacks today. The 6 cylinder w/ the conventional automatic transmission (sweet) and the 4 cylinder w/ the CVT. Definitely feels weird & I don't think I like the CVT but it's almost one of those things where I'd have to drive it for a good week or so to get used to it. I don't know that a 10 minute test drive prepares someone for long-term relationship with something like a CVT.

Also, the 4-cylinder I drove had a weird issue where it kept thinking my door was open & would put that on the dash/screen & keep turning the dome lights on. Guy finally admitted that it was a glitch as my door was definitely shut. One of those things that makes ya go, "Hmmm.....do I really want to buy a non big-3 car?"

Otherwise good vehicle, though I think my next test should probably be an Equinox and Outback as close to back-to-back as possible. My mind says Equinox at the moment but we'll see.
Click to expand...

I strongly considered an Outback. V6 would have been the only way I would have gone.
 
The new 2012 subaru outback is probably the only outback I would consider...it does not actually look like a wagon, it's almost crossover/SUV looking.

Get a Q5 😀
 
Sounds like you want room for seating comfort rather than for storage.

If that's the case, have you considered an Avalon? The front and (especially) rear seats are huge and it gets very similar MPG as the Camry.
 
I have tried the Taurus which was large like the Avalon, though the back seat legroom was not what I was hoping. HUGE trunk. Fairly large front seat area but the rear suffered a bit. Nice vehicle. The V-6 certainly scoots that beast but I wish they'd gone the extra mile & given more rear legroom.

I'll consider the Avalon, though I wish it looked a little less, "Hey, I'm 65 years old. Dig my whip?"
 
Pulsar said:
Check out a 2012 Taurus. HUGE inside - it's actually nearly as tall as a crossover though you'd never think it.

It's also ranked #1 in the large car segment.
http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/Ford_Taurus/

The rather entertaining part is that there were no tremendous changes from '11 to '12, yet the score went from #1 and a 9.2 to #1 with a 8.7. Hmmmmm.
Click to expand...

LOLOLOLOL
a Taurus over a Camry? get real. the Taurus would depriciate by half as soon as you leave the lot.
 
Well and I can tell you right now that in regards to the Camry vs Avalon the only advantage the Avalon would have for me is rear seat legroom which the new '12 Camry has PLENTY of and by the comparison #'s......AND THIS IS EMBARRASSING TO SAY THE LEAST........the $35K Avalon has LESS trunk space than the Camry. (14.4 vs 15.4)

You've got to be kidding me.

Taurus can't get the back right & Avalon can't get the trunk right.
 
If the Avalon is out, then consider a Buick Lucerne. Size is a little bigger but worse on MPG. And I think it is more of an "old person" car than the Avalon is but that is my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top