Battle of the (somewhat) boring

We just moved to Central Oregon and my wife is in need of an AWD snow rig to replace her 135i. I've been looking at the usual suspects under $20K (more like $15K) and I've narrowed it down to these 3 (all used). Does anyone have experience with any of these sick rides? 

2013-2016 Acura RDX -About the same price used as a CRV but with more fancy stuff and a J series. 

2010-2012 Toyota RAV4 V6 - I like the 3500lb towing, I hate the side opening rear door.

2013 and up Mazda CX-5 - I haven't driven one but I hear that they are fun for what they are.

This is the only input I have:  

In reply to ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ :

I like what I see there. However, that gen of RAV4 doesn't have the big boy V6. For some reason I want to run mid 6 second 0-60 in a boring SUV that I won't actually drive that much.

My kid brother has a RAV4 of that generation and it's been dead reliable.  Other than that I don't know anything about it.

Why not a Highlander with the V6? 

The 1st gen is about the same size as the that gen RAV4 and the 2nd gen is about in the middle, but it doesn't have the stupid rear door. 

The V6 mostly came with AWD and there's also a hybrid version if you roll that way.

The Lexus RX300/350 is the same as the Highlander underneath (both Camry based).

That said, they are pretty much appliances and I've found the RAV4 to ride much more harshly with the back seats being a bit more hard in feel.

The CX5/7 are more fun to drive, though the CX7 I drove with the turbo motor had some odd throttle feel to it, but that may have been the one I drove.

This was really cool in person...

RAV4 V6 is a great all-around vehicle.  It's quicker, and in Sport guise better handling, than it really had any right to be. It got respectable fuel economy, takes regular unleaded, and has understated good looks that should continue to age well. We actually liked the side opening door, in part because we never had to contend with the tailgate-to-garage-door interference problem we have now.  Admittedly ours had the lighter, and easier to manipulate, Sport Appearance Package tailgate without the spare tire.  When equipped without the (largely useless) 3rd row seats, there is also a nice secondary under-floor storage in the back.

As for things to look out for: Spend some substantial time in the seats though to make sure they work for you. Many people find they become rather uncomfortable after any significant length of time. Also the view cameras and bluetooth for your phone were rarely equipped, and a joke when they were, if that is of any importance to you or your wife. Also make sure there is no gear whine, especially noticeable at lower (~30mph on our, IIRC) speeds, as that is a known issue with the transmission, that would only have been covered while it was under warranty.  It's not especially common, and was covered by a TSD rather than a recall, but the only fix I am aware of is to replace the transmission.

In reply to Driven5 :

Thanks, this is the info that I'm looking for! I know Toyota's are reliable but every car has its quirks. I'm no too worried about cameras and bluetooth - I would probably rip it out and put in aftermarket stuff.

What about the 1st-gen Acura RDX? Not a big V6, but a cool factory-turbo K-series with a top-mount intercooler. I recall there were some hop-up goodies for that engine too

Or the weirdo short-lived Acura ZDX? Pretty conventional under the skin, with a wacky polarizing outer layer.

In reply to singleslammer :

Yeah, that latest generation of RDX is sweet. The same motor as the Type R, torque vectoring awd.....but $40K +

In reply to kilgoretrout :

Also note that while the suspension on the RAV4 V6 Sport allow it to handle surprisingly well, that does definitely come at a ride quality cost compared to the 'Limited' trim...Especially on the Sport Appearance Package which came equipped with Run Flat Tires. The Limated came with a easier/cheaper to replace tire size on 17's, as opposed to the 18's on the Sport. 

If max AWD traction is expected to be needed for getting started moving, in advance of the computer detecting slippage, the AWD system allows you to lock the center diff at the push of a button up to 25 or 30 mph. I want to say it might have had some basic/primitive hill descent control too.

Honestly though, while it doesn't have the power, I've heard nothing but good about the CX5...Including it's handling. Combine that with its comparatively stellar fuel economy, and anymore I would probably find it hard not to lean that way in this group, as long as your wife isn't a power monger and you don't have anything that needs to be towed by it. As good and enjoyable (and quick) of a vehicle as the RAV4 V6 was, there is probably no getting around the fact that it's a 7 year older platform.

NickD said:

What about the 1st-gen Acura RDX? Not a big V6, but a cool factory-turbo K-series with a top-mount intercooler. I recall there were some hop-up goodies for that engine too.

The gas mileage is pretty horrific from what I've heard and the ground clearance is not great. 

NickD said:

What about the 1st-gen Acura RDX? Not a big V6, but a cool factory-turbo K-series with a top-mount intercooler. I recall there were some hop-up goodies for that engine too

Or the weirdo short-lived Acura ZDX? Pretty conventional under the skin, with a wacky polarizing outer layer.

Not to mention horrific gas mileage.  I was looking for a little SUV thing a couple years ago and that was on my list as they had been well reviewed, but I've heard that 22mpg on the highway is a stretch.  And if you're okay with 22mpg highway, I'm thinking there's other vehicles out there that are better.  

Also, any reason in particular why no Subie's on the list? Coming from a 135i, she obviously doesn't need much space, an Impreza or a WRX would probably be more fun than a RAV4.  

rothwem said:

NickD said:

What about the 1st-gen Acura RDX? Not a big V6, but a cool factory-turbo K-series with a top-mount intercooler. I recall there were some hop-up goodies for that engine too

Or the weirdo short-lived Acura ZDX? Pretty conventional under the skin, with a wacky polarizing outer layer.

Not to mention horrific gas mileage.  I was looking for a little SUV thing a couple years ago and that was on my list as they had been well reviewed, but I've heard that 22mpg on the highway is a stretch.  And if you're okay with 22mpg highway, I'm thinking there's other vehicles out there that are better.  

Also, any reason in particular why no Subie's on the list? Coming from a 135i, she obviously doesn't need much space, an Impreza or a WRX would probably be more fun than a RAV4.  

Ahh, wasn't aware of the RDX's fuel mileage. Funny that you mention Subarus though, because they are notoriously thirsty. My Baja has the N/A 165hp SOHC 2.5L EJ253 with a 5-speed and manages only 20mpg on a good day, while being hideously slow.

rothwem said:

Also, any reason in particular why no Subie's on the list? Coming from a 135i, she obviously doesn't need much space, an Impreza or a WRX would probably be more fun than a RAV4.  

Space will be an issue when a kiddo shows up. I did consider a WRX, but I'm not sure I'd want a used one and I'm also not too keen on spending big money on a new one. A Forester, with a 6 speed would work too but I keep reading things about oil burning problems with the FB25 motors.

3 good options, you don't make this easy. I would take the Rav because of my affection for the motor (and i've driven them, and like them) with the RDX as second.  

I had a 2010 Rav4 4wd 4-cyl for about 2 years.  I traded it in last year for a low mile 4th gen 4Runner just because I've always wanted one.  I love my 4Runner, but I liked the Rav4  better in some ways. It has more rear legroom/headroom and was much easier getting my son in and out.  It had a decent amount of ground clearance and was easy to get in/out of ( I'm 5'11 3/4).  It even had a locking center diff, which I never did use.   It did fine in the snow with just all seasons.  The gas mileage was about 7 mpg more. The V6 also has hill start assist and hill descent control, on the 4wd models anyhow.  I did try to find a V6 version especially in Sport trim, but just couldn't hardly find any.  Not too much to worry about with those and I did tons of research.  I've heard they are fast.  I would rock one again as a DD in all weather climates especially with that 3.5L.  That engine would make it not so boring. That's the one I'd go with.  The others would be fine, but an RDX for 15K would have a lot more miles I would think. 

FYI-  Some had the Sport Appearance Package without a spare tire in the rear hatch so they recommended run-flats which I've heard makes a harsh ride?  I wouldn't want run flat tires and have no spare.

the base model rental cx5 I had was pretty neat, even with the e-parking brake you could ROAST the tire with the 2.5 and it would let you. 

and I'm not just saying the cx5 because im wasted on mazda kool-aid either.

Good snows for the 135i?

CX5 seems to be a great car.  The CX7 is less great.  What makes it not great is the complex turbo engine.  

Here is one source that calls it the worst used car.  https://www.yahoo.com/news/bp/car-dealer-scientific-guide-10-worst-used-vehicles-222709616.html

However, there is one bright spot in the CX7 story. From its intro in '07 through '09 the only engine offered was the 2.3L turbo 4.  Same as offered in the MazdaSpeed6.  For '10-'12 the entry model got the trusted 2.5L NA4 which is shared across the Mazda line and the Ford line.  Reliable, regular engine.    The horrible reputation of the  CX7 name from the turbos might lead you to some depreciation on the NA versions that fewer people know exists.

Another issue is that the 2.5L NA engine is only offered in fwd.  That may be good because it reduces complexity.  

02Pilot said:

Good snows for the 135i?

 

More than anything, we're pretty sick of the problems that we've had with the Bimmer. That + kids in the future = something boring. 

I service a first gen V6 Highlander AWD at my job. It’s a fleet vehicle and is beaten pretty mercilessly. It’s regularly loaded down with college students and driven into the desert. It has almost 140k now and has been very reliable. Besides basic maintenance we put struts on it, that’s it. The interior is bland but very functional and it’s quicker than it has any right to be.  

I have little experience with the other vehicles but I’m a fan of the Mazda koolaid and I would buy a CX5. 

Crosstreks would be worth looking into if they fit your budget and you don’t mind trading power for fuel economy. 

Thought this was an autocross thread. 

John Welsh said:

CX5 seems to be a great car.  The CX7 is less great.  What makes it not great is the complex turbo engine.  

Here is one source that calls it the worst used car.  https://www.yahoo.com/news/bp/car-dealer-scientific-guide-10-worst-used-vehicles-222709616.html

However, there is one bright spot in the CX7 story. From its intro in '07 through '09 the only engine offered was the 2.3L turbo 4.  Same as offered in the MazdaSpeed6.  For '10-'12 the entry model got the trusted 2.5L NA4 which is shared across the Mazda line and the Ford line.  Reliable, regular engine.    The horrible reputation of the  CX7 name from the turbos might lead you to some depreciation on the NA versions that fewer people know exists.

 

My friend has a turbo CX-7. He's not a car guy and so he can't really get in-depth with me about whats going on, but shortly after he got it (used) it needed an engine. Had the engine replaced (used engine), drove it a few months and they found metal flakes in the engine oil. Supposedly the turbocharger was failing, so the shop replaced just the turbocharger, then shortly afterwards the 2nd engine went south, surprise, surprise. Had that engine replaced, and now I guess he was told that the engine is going out again. He's now fighting for the place that sold it to him to give him his money back as well.