sac's SUV-buying saga - finally complete!

ktc - That isn't what their websites say. Now, I know that vehicles rarely get their published fuel economy, but I figure that comparing those figures is as close as I can get to "apples to apples". I've seen as high as 28 hwy for non-hybrids mentioned in this thread.

sac said:

mammabear - Do the two rear seats fold down flat?

Yes!

We have pretty good gas mileage too. It's much better than our Volvo XC90. I want to say average is 22-24mpg.

And I know the mpg was better than the Acura MDX.

I don't like SUV's in general, but yeah, that MDX is handsome.

mammabear - The Ford Explorer website says 20 city/28 highway so your experience sounds consistent with what I would expect everyday reality to be. Definitely better than the Acura and not as costly a vehicle. (Although they ALL give me sticker shock!)

Please- google reviews of the 2.0 engine. MT "gives it a crap review which it deserves". The reviews are scathing. It's an absurdly heavy vehicle 4800 lbs). And you want to move it with a 4 pot engine? Add a full load of people and gear and it's just not drivable. And keep in mind the 4 pot is only available on the fwd, not Awd.

Also don't forget it's a turbo engine. I love turbos in smaller lighter cars- but they do drive quite differently.

If you're willing to accept fwd, then look at the new Chryslers with the Pentastar v-6. Far better performance and hiway mPg will easily hit 25.

peteglider said:

Also don't forget it's a turbo engine. I love turbos in smaller lighter cars- but they do drive quite differently.

Modern turbo's, when configured properly, drive no differently to a normally aspirated car. The days of huge turbo lag are long gone for most manufacturers.

peteglider - Are you talking about the Ford Explorer? I just want to be sure that I get my notes in on the right models.

I'm not making any decisions yet, just gathering data.

I'll definitely be reading everything I can get my hands on and checking them out in person when the time comes.

I think we're going to want AWD or 4WD for those back road vacation excursions, but I know that it's a hit on the mpg - I'll be gathering all the data to figure out which trade-offs should be made as I know that there will be some.

Too bad you want a larger car because the MINI Countryman S All4 would fit the bill. It's effectively an on demand AWD system that moves for to front wheel drive the fast you go.
MPG is pretty decent but the interior dimensions just wouldn't work for you.

The countryman is great, but yes, a little small for sleeping!

sac said:

peteglider - Are you talking about the Ford Explorer? I just want to be sure that I get my notes in on the right models.

I'm not making any decisions yet, just gathering data.

I'll definitely be reading everything I can get my hands on and checking them out in person when the time comes.

I think we're going to want AWD or 4WD for those back road vacation excursions, but I know that it's a hit on the mpg - I'll be gathering all the data to figure out which trade-offs should be made as I know that there will be some.

yes, the Explorer

Has anyone mentioned the Buick Enclave? Very nice reviews, great cargo (flat floor), three rows, and 4500 lb towing capacity:

http://www.edmunds.com/buick/enclave/2012/?sub=suv#fullreview

debby said:

Has anyone mentioned the Buick Enclave? Very nice reviews, great cargo (flat floor), three rows, and 4500 lb towing capacity:

http://www.edmunds.com/buick/enclave/2012/?sub=suv#fullreview

AWD version gets 16 city, 22 hiway -- hardly "good"

Its twins (triplets?) are the Chevrolet Traverse & GMC Acadia. (and formerly the Saturn Outlook)

peteglider said:

Please- google reviews of the 2.0 engine. MT "gives it a crap review which it deserves". The reviews are scathing. It's an absurdly heavy vehicle 4800 lbs). And you want to move it with a 4 pot engine? Add a full load of people and gear and it's just not drivable. And keep in mind the 4 pot is only available on the fwd, not Awd.

Also don't forget it's a turbo engine. I love turbos in smaller lighter cars- but they do drive quite differently.

If you're willing to accept fwd, then look at the new Chryslers with the Pentastar v-6. Far better performance and hiway mPg will easily hit 25.

Our Explorer is not turbo. It's a 4WD optional.

Another thread with some similar information: http://www.southorangevillage.com/vc/discussion/87401/car-with-3rd-row-of-seats-fuel-efficiency-and-rear-visibility

We love our Hyundai Tucson, but the mileage is appalling -- 24 highway at best. However, back seats fold completely flat and it's great for schlepping, as well as very comfortable for sitting. We don't have the additional back row seating, so I don't know about that -- ours seats 5.

peteglider, what's a pot?

Tom_Reingold said:

peteglider, what's a pot?

A cylinder.

Another somewhat related discussion - http://www.southorangevillage.com/vc/discussion/87838/need-advicereviews-from-current-minivan-owners-please

Tom_Reingold said:

peteglider, what's a pot?

Must.....Not.....Comment........

SAC, I have a 2006 Pilot. If you want to come on up the block and take mine for a spin, email me at my regular email address-michele

DEFCON_Creator said:

Tom_Reingold said:

peteglider, what's a pot?

Must.....Not.....Comment........

Hey, I'm not a motorhead. I'm sure I could smother you in bike or computer or telephony or music jargon.

Some 4wd modules allow you to switch between 4wd and 2wd, which would help your MPG while in 2wd, and give you the ability to shift to 4wd for your off the pavement needs.
Some things that effect MPG, would be making your engine do extra work- added friction (4wd vs 2wd), poor aerodynamics(vertical height/ground clearance), added weight (large enough to sit 3 across).
So most of the features that you are looking for.

That being said the Jeep Grand Cherokee has a good mix of those features that you are looking for.

aelfkins said:

That being said the Jeep Grand Cherokee has a good mix of those features that you are looking for.

I'm under the impression that fuel efficiency is important to sac. The Grand Cherokee gets 16 mpg if you're lucky.

I'd like it to get at least mid 20s on the highway, which is what my old minivan gets.

My 2001 Subaru Outback gets 23-24 mpg on the highway when I'm lucky. Winter time is more like < 20 mpg.
AWD is a mpg killer.

When I get more serious about this process, I'm definitely going to have to go back and re-read the "Car Business" thread - http://www.southorangevillage.com/vc/discussion/90483/the-car-business. Lots of good info there.

Note the gas lamp in the intro to this review of the 2011 Outback...

-s.

Here's another 2011 review...

-s.

Or...