Hi people , any opinions from those who have driven (or deal in) these vehicles , I understand they are a "stretched Rav4", are they AWD only and what are thoughts in comparo to the Mitsi Outlander v6 , which many view as one of the better-driving SUV's and they are 2wd-able for our 99% city driving (even if the dash plastics would be rejected by Lego toys). Firstly yes , to most of the expected responses I know I should just be looking at a normal car/wagon but the wife's crook back is probably going to be better with a higher-seated driving position and the extra rear seats will be handy occasionally, so I see this as a bit of a toe-in-the-water purchase and not a last-ever car . (That is also why it is 3 litre+ engine only for me as I am happy to sacrifice fuel bills for something that has some performance at least, as going to a heavier vehicle with only 2.4ltr AND less driving enjoyment than my old Mazda 3 sports hatch would be just too much. And please no "have you tried some diesel alternative brand?" comments, as I know they have good torque and are worlds away from even how they were 10yrs ago, but they still have no enjoyment in how they deliver the power/sound for me. Cheers.
gman35,
Aug 14, 7:40pm
You're a Toyota man aren't you Kaz ? You must know about them.
tamarillo,
Aug 14, 9:26pm
Good on you, petrol is just more fun! Won't comment on those two but possibly add the three litre outback six as good compromise too. The one I drove recently was latest model and access and ingress was great with my crook back. Using an old Volvo XC70 at present which is better height than plain car too.
gman35,
Aug 14, 10:06pm
Thanks tamarillo , you would be amazed how most people don't get what I am saying, but the "sterile" nature of most (Korean especially) vehicles of this type, in regards to their engine and chassis performance would send me to sleep. I am not wanting to drive everywhere at max speed but just want something that still sounds nice with a few revs on and feels like it is attached to the road. I have considered the Outback but thought the seating would still be lowish as per a normal Legacy ?
brapbrap8,
Aug 14, 10:18pm
The Outback is higher than a Legacy. Depends how high it needs to be for you though, as obviously it is still not as high as an SUV. A million times better to drive though, especially if you go for the flat 6.
tamarillo,
Aug 14, 10:18pm
Relative to body yes it was in same height, but whole car is raised somewhat. Not as big a difference as SUV you mention, but higher than standard. It's a compromise that might be enough. The new one I drove is now a cvt box which personally I just couldn't gel with, ruined the whole point of the bigger engine. Unsure if you're going new, previous outback six used conventional box. If you like some character would you look at Volvo? You can get the T6 xc60 which would be grunty and arguably be better road car but still have height. Or go whole hog and get a Jeep Grand Cherokee srt8! Friend has one, had brief drive, ridiculous power for an SUV ! Is the vanguard an import highlander? I've used them as rentals and enjoyed the silky engine. Is a ford territory a possible? Simple falcon drive line, some are two wheel drive only.
gman35,
Aug 14, 10:49pm
(reply to #6) Vanguard apparently a longer Rav4, width appears the same. Looking around the $25k mark so may leave the SRT as that amount of $$ alone may only cover the fuel bills for 1st year ! Those Volvo XC60's are quite nice in a Sportswagon type of style aren't they, may pay me to do a test drive of one at least. Territory's drive great but due to sheer weight would be heavy on gas around town and one size too big for what we need really, I am a "Ford man" if anything, but also not exactly sold on any Aussie-built vehicle quality and finish.
tamarillo,
Aug 14, 11:14pm
My little brother in UK checked out all the mid sized SUV on market and loved the Volvo XC60 best, partly due to value for money as he got more for his company limit. But it impressed me as passenger and that was the diesel. Just as high as others which he wanted, but somehow felt more car like, less rollypolly and more stable on turns. There's a few of the t6 models coming in from Japan.
gman35,
Aug 14, 11:23pm
Yep, just been looking at a few on here. Don't want to sound too picky but Volvo must use the same wildly varied colour chart as Audi/Merc/BMW (Black/Charcoal/Grey/A slightly lighter grey/Silver/White). Oh hang on, I just saw a "bronze" one wow ! Not buying just yet but you have expanded my ideas thanks.
tamarillo,
Aug 15, 12:26am
Agreed. How much of that is a jap market thing I'm not sure, but they do kinda blend.
tamarillo,
Aug 15, 12:28am
Ok, now that you're open to other stuff what about the BMW X3 with the 2.5 or even the 3 litre petrol? Can even see blue ones!
tamarillo,
Aug 15, 12:45am
That vanguard is interesting, looked it up and as you say it's Japan only lwb RAV4 with a 209kw 3.5 in it, which means it's lighter but more powerful than highlander. Hope someone who has one can tell us how it is on our roads though, might have unsuitable suspension maybe? Should go well though.
sport_billy,
Aug 15, 7:01am
I liked both the Vanguard and the Outlander - although considered the VRX mitsi with leather interior nicer than the equivalent Vanguard (odd dash & beige/brown leather). Ended up with a 3.6 Outback with all the bells & whistles, haven't looked back. Great wagon & sure moves along! Find the height great for easy access - with nicer on road handling than the SUV's proper - still the same ground clearance tho
kimbo88,
Aug 15, 8:24am
My vote goes with the Vanguard - I am unashamedly a Toyota man but I also have a bad back that can make getting in and out of some vehicles a difficult experience. I have found that the RAV4/Vanguard is the most comfortable of anything that I have tried so far - and for me personally also a lot more comfortable than trying to get in and out of a Prado (which is higher). The 3.5 litre engine is great, and makes them an incredibly pleasant car to drive. Economy isn't too bad for size either really - they are a full time 4WD with a 5 speed conventional auto trans. I find that they have very comfortable seating, and for me are probably the ideal car for getting in and out of with the bad back. Take one out on a test and see what you think of them.
kimbo88,
Aug 15, 8:38am
Seating wise, they are also available in either 5 or 7 seat versions, and if someone doesn't have any need for the 7 seater at all, the 5 seater is the better option as it then has a huge amount of extra room in the back area, with additional storage space under the floor where the 7 seater's seats fold down into when not in use. The 5 seater is also 40 Kgs lighter than the 7 seater.
gman35,
Aug 15, 6:15pm
Cheers Billy , is it a 2010-2013ish model Outback ? The 3.6 engine ones do sound like a nice-driving vehicle. Great info also thanks alot kimbo , finally some great informative feedback from someone who has owned one.
sport_billy,
Oct 5, 11:30am
Mines a 2010 Premium. Has been slightly cheaper to run than my last 3.0 Legacy with a lot more go. Nice cruiser but can hike along and handles the twisties surprisingly well for what it is. Ex-company vehicle, I'm the second owner @ 150kms If you went with a Vanguard I don't imagine you'd go too wrong either! Still a very nice vehicle. Speaking to the guys at work with company Rav's in a 2.4 fuel economy isn't too far apart.
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.