Personal Picks: Luxury SUVs

Luxury SUVS…are there more politically-incorrect vehicles on the road today? The December test group of $58,000-$71,000 machines might seem like a head-scratcher now. But, surprisingly, our subscribers tell us in our Annual Questionnaire that they own these things: we have significant data on Toyota Land Cruisers, Porsche Cayennes, and Land Rover Range Rover Sports. However, we do not have enough data on the Hummer H2. It’s probably not a stretch to say that Consumer Reports subscribers and H2 owners usually don’t go together. So, why do we test them? To cover the full spectrum of mainstream models to empower our readers to make informed decisions.

What would we buy if we won the lottery? Here’s a look:

Tom Mutchler: If I’m in the market for a $60,000 SUV (trust me – I’m not), I don’t want to wind up annoyed every time I drive it. I don’t want the nagging feeling that a cheaper model was bigger and more capable. And when I drive it, I really don’t want people waving at me with less than five fingers.

That limits my choices here. The Porsche Cayenne annoys me: it has a stiff ride, tight seats, illegible optional $1,200 (!) brown-faced gauges, and inscrutable radio controls. A sweet exhaust note and good grip just aren’t enough to win me over. As nice as the Toyota Land Cruiser is, the Sequoia has a lot more space and tows more. (I can live without the LC’s cool “crawl” off-road mode for $10,000 less.) Unless I had to climb a rock hill everyday to get to work, a Hummer H2 isn’t in the cards. Passersby aren’t exactly afraid to share their opinions – pro and con – about the H2, either.

Even though I feel a bit guilty about it, I really like our Land Rover Range Rover Sport. It’s fetching in Lucerne green and pale leather; it’s no surprise that an identical truck was part of the prolific product placement on the aiming-at-the-upscale Bravo TV show “Top Design.” You sit up high and there are big windows. Power isn’t generous without the optional supercharger, but the HSE’s V8 sounds really good. Finally, the Sport handles a lot better than our 2005 LR3, which shares this truck’s platform.

I’m a logical guy. Land Rover is at the bottom of CR’s reliability ratings. An Acura MDX is a far more practical purchase. And the RR’s profligate with fuel. But I’m happy to put a (non-alcoholic) beverage into the Sport’s console refrigerator, go for a drive, and be happy that nothing’s broke on it yet.

Gabe Shenhar: If you’re going to be politically-incorrect and socially irresponsible, and still get your bonus this year, you might as well go all the way and treat yourself. Right? Truthfully, nobody actually “needs” any one of these four indulgent SUVs; there are other vehicles that do the same for less.

That said, I found myself enjoying two of these luxury SUVs for entirety different reasons. The Land Cruiser, with its comfortable ride, quiet cabin and utterly amazing off-road ability impresses the heck out of me. But as a suburban family three-row SUV, its tall stance, clumsy handling and compromised packaging detract. And, for that lofty price, I could get a Mercedes-Benz GL320 diesel that drives beautifully and gets decent gas mileage.

I also like driving the Cayenne. It’s one of the few SUVs you can truly hustle in corners, and it has the great steering and brake feel of a Porsche. The catapult and sound of the V8 is addicting. You put up with the stiff ride and some unintuitive controls, but what else do you expect for $70,000? Rationally speaking, however, there isn’t a whole lot the Cayenne does that the BMW X5 doesn’t do, other than being more exclusive.

Rick Small: I’m not a big fan of this group. The Cayenne is relatively sporty but heavy and large – seems like a rolling oxymoron. It really can’t do “sporty” very well and it’s too expensive. The Land Cruiser does a good job as a large luxury SUV. But for me it’s too big and clumsy to drive every day. If you need this size vehicle and want some luxury, the Cruiser is a good choice. The Range Rover is expensive and great off-road but not as comfortable or reliable as the Land Cruiser. I don’t think too many people do serious off-roading with a vehicle this expensive, anyway. The Hummer tows well but is not very roomy. It’s also expensive (do you see a pattern here?), thirsty and very awkward to drive. For my money, I would choose a three-row Mazda CX-9 or Honda Pilot. These are much less expensive, reliable, use less fuel and are better every day drivers than these luxurious beasts. The CX-9 favors the sporty side while the Pilot leans more toward comfort.

Mike Quincy: The Cayenne, Range Rover Sport and (especially) the Hummer are train wrecks: people can’t help but stare and be oddly fascinated by what they see. If I had to pick my 9-year-old son up from school or at a friend’s house, he loved it when I showed up in the H2. If my wife and I were going out, she was always a bit more jazzed to see the Cayenne. And I agree with Tom’s assessment of the Range Rover Sport: it’s surprisingly nice to drive. But to keep these brutes running means paying hefty bills – either for gas, maintenance or both. At least the Land Cruiser has a history of good reliability, but its 14 mpg overall makes me cringe.

The truth is that if I’m spending crazy money, I’d rather have a good pickup truck than any of the models we’ve covered here. But I’ll stick with the “luxury” theme and treat myself to a top-of-the-line GMC Sierra Denali crew-cab pickup. Though still a gasoline pig, it has style, luxury, one of the best sounding and smoothest V8s around, and I can actually haul stuff without worrying about it getting dirty. I’ll also save enough to buy a new road bike (hint, hint…Christmas is coming, honey). In reality, I can’t afford the truck, though, but maybe the bike.

2008 SEMA: Cargo Sock protects SUV cargo area

Wandering the seemingly-endless show floor at the SEMA show, sometimes you see a product that stops you in your zombie-like tracks and simply invokes a “Why didn’t I think of that?” response. This year’s entry: the Cargo Sock. (Not to be confused with the AutoSock for tires.)

As I wrote recently in a Personal Pick, I find that my minivan does almost everything that an SUV can do. But neither is quite as good as a pickup truck for hauling loose, messy loads. Sure, I throw down an old blanket in the back to ease cleaning, but that doesn’t do much to protect the side panels or headliner. The battle scars, er, scratches in the back of my Odyssey are testament to this.

The $200-$240 Cargo Sock is basically a big nylon bag that envelopes the entire cargo bay of a mid-sized or large SUV. (Other sizes, including small SUVs and minivans, are coming soon.) You suspend the sock sack inside using straps through the side and rear doors and over the roof. A flap covers the vehicle’s rear bumper when unloading, and a clever clear plastic window lets you see out of your rear window.

This looks like a clever way to extend the usefulness of your SUV while protecting it at the same time.

—Tom Mutchler

Read about more cars, gear, news, and views from SEMA.

Just In: Mercury Mariner Hybrid

It’s a frequently asked question: “Why isn’t the Ford Escape Hybrid in your ratings?” With the recent fluctuations in fuel costs, some have wondered why we don’t list this efficient American hybrid SUV.

Here’s the reason: We had tested the 2005 Ford Escape Hybrid. But when Ford updated the Escape for 2008, they didn’t make all of the upcoming changes to the car at once. For 2008, the Escape had a less-than-extreme interior and exterior makeover and non-hybrid Escapes finally got standard stability control. Problem was, the Hybrid wasn’t so blessed for 2008. That omission was addressed for 2009, along with the addition of a new 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine for both the Hybrid and non-hybrid. Since we buy all the cars we test, we prefer to get more “shelf life” out of them, ensuring they have long-term value to our readers. So we didn’t test an Escape Hybrid when we evaluated the 2008 Escape V6. (Watch the Ford Escape road test video.) Instead, we waited for a 2009 Hybrid to assess the substantial changes for the new model year.

As it turns out, even the last Escape we tested didn’t last long: the V6 got several upgrades for 2009, including more power and claimed better braking -- a sore spot in our tests. So now we own two more Escapes: a 2009 four-cylinder and a V6.

As for the Hybrid, it seems they’re a hot commodity, with long waiting lists and next to none available sitting on dealer lots. So we put our name on a list and waited. And waited. We waited until we found a 2009 Mercury Mariner Hybrid sitting on a local lot. Since the Mariner and Escape only differ cosmetically, we grabbed it.

All of the Mariners we could find were pretty much loaded; we couldn’t escape (no pun intended) buying one without a navigation system. Along with leather and sunroof, these options pushed the price from an already high $32,225 to a lofty $36,615.

We’ll see if the Mariner meets or beats the 26 mpg overall that we got with the 2005 Ford Escape Hybrid we last tested. Expect a First Drive report online soon.

--Tom Mutchler

Photo by Mike Leung

Personal Picks: 3-row SUVs

Times are tough if you’re selling SUVs these days. While many families like the space offered by midsized and larger three-row SUVs, they’re often concerned about fuel economy. Once you add AWD and common options, these vehicles don’t come cheap, either – a problem in a tight economy. Finally, while big truck-based SUVs used to generate big profits, sales are moving toward car-based alternatives. So how do you sell such vehicles in this climate?

Gathered in the November 3-row SUV test group are some of the latest efforts from Detroit and Japan. But as far as fuel economy goes, if you want the best you have to pony up over $40,000 for a Toyota Highlander Hybrid—but it returns an impressive 24 mpg overall. At the other end of the spectrum are the old-style, truck-based SUVs, such as the Cadillac Escalade, Dodge Durango, Ford Expedition, and Nissan Armada, which all get 13 mpg overall.

But are these vehicles necessary? Here’s a look at what we would choose if we wanted a three-row SUV in our garage:

Rick Small: Within this category, I like to drive the Mazda CX-9 the most. It has quicker response and a sportier feel to it than other competing models. The driving position is pretty good for my tall frame. But fuel economy could be better – it gets just 16 mpg overall. The new Ford Flex was a pleasant surprise; it’s quiet and rides very well. It has plenty of room in the second-row seat and a useful third row. While I like the versatile cargo area is, I wish the driving position was more comfortable.

We also have the latest version of the GM’s three-row crossovers, the Chevrolet Traverse. So far it’s very similar to the Buick Enclave and Saturn Outlook versions we previously tested. The Traverse has a good ride, fairly responsive handling, and a roomy second-row seat and useful cargo area. Unfortunately, the Enclave, Outlook and Acadia all have below-average predicted reliability. (We have no data yet for the new Traverse.)

The Honda Pilot does most things pretty well; it gets a little better fuel economy than the others here and we predict above-average reliability. You couldn’t go wrong by buying it – just don’t look for a sporty experience.

Tom Mutchler: As our Ratings show, the three-row SUV market is crowded with a lot of good choices. In fact, I’m having a hard time narrowing down which one I’d buy. I’ve very happily taken long road trips in our Mazda CX-9, Ford Flex, and our previously tested Buick Enclave. Which one you prefer depends on details: the CX-9 has sporty handling, the Flex has distinctive looks, and the Enclave blends room with luxury.

Maybe the reason I’m having a hard time picking a three-row SUV is that I’d rather own a minivan. (Indeed, I do.)

Beyond towing my someday-Airstream, there isn’t anything that I would need a SUV to do that a minivan can’t do better. My Honda Odyssey has much more cargo volume, allowing me to haul my whitewater kayaks and mountain bikes (standing up!) inside with room to spare. There’s more passenger space, with business-class accommodations in the second-row captains chairs. Like the CX-9, the spry Odyssey is surprisingly fun on twisty back roads, as proven convincingly on a vacation turn on Skyline Drive. On that same trip, I averaged 25 mpg, far better fuel economy than I got out of the SUVs. (Our test results show similar benefits.)

Sure, I don’t have AWD, but a set of Bridgestone Blizzak snow tires improve snowy road stopping and turning beyond just the traction gains of AWD. I do wish it was quieter inside, like the Flex and Enclave, but a Toyota Sienna rivals them.

Nope, a minivan isn’t cool. No one dreams of conquering the Sahara or the arctic tundra behind the wheel of a minivan. But for hauling your family or lots of stuff, you can’t do better.

Mike Quincy: Since my life doesn’t include towing heavy trailers or going very far off-road, I’m still sticking with the Toyota Highlander Hybrid. It’s the king here for fuel economy, predicted reliability is off-the-charts good, and it drives more like a nice car than a truck. I also find it more entertaining to drive (and quieter) than most minivans. I still like GM’s Traverse/Enclave/Outlook/Acadia lineup, but my wish that I made for these a little over a year ago for “a torquey turbo-diesel engine” still hasn’t come true. But now, more than ever, is the time for fuel efficiency. With improved fuel economy, GM could right the listing SUV ship.

3-row SUVs - Road test and videos

Our November test group evaluated 3-row SUVs. These large vehicles have been favorites with families, offering seating for up to eight, four-wheel-drive capability, and plenty of cargo space.

The full road test from the magazine has been posted at ConsumerReports.org, along with videos hosted by our automotive experts. These videos highlight the strengths and weaknesses of each model, bringing the road tests to life.

SUVs tested include the new Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid, distinctive Ford Flex, upgraded Mazda CX-9, redesigned Honda Pilot, and truck-based Toyota Sequoia.

At the other end of the spectrum from these people-movers, read our Smart ForTwo review and watch the video. It may be cute and fuel efficient, but be forewarned: the ForTwo finished at the bottom of our subcompact car Ratings.

In the December issue, we’ll report on luxury SUVs.

—Desiree Calamari

From the logbook: 2009 Ford Flex

If I was a product planner for a car company, I’d be chugging Pepto-Bismol by the caseload right now. A few months ago, gas prices were marching steadily toward $5 a gallon. Car companies cut production capability for large SUVs, trucks, and minivans as buyers flocked to small cars. But now, fuel is back under $4. Meanwhile, crossovers were selling strong a few months back, but now reports surface that their sales are slumping.

Of course, there are short-term adjustments and long-term trends in the automotive marketplace. Introduce into this whirlwind the Ford Flex. With Ford having dropped its mediocre Freestar minivan, and as sales of the aging truck-based Explorer shrink, the Flex offers an alternative family hauler in their line-up.

Funny thing is, Ford doesn’t lack a car-based people mover; they have the Taurus X, which is quite competent. But it’s a wallflower compared to the Flex, which is a combination of a 5/4ths scale Mini Clubman, a surfer wagon, and a hearse. This unique styling gets a lot of looks. I found myself in Syracuse, NY, during the Nationals classic car show. Even though the hotel parking lot was full of street rods and old muscle cars, a lot of people were staring at the Flex. (Their cars were likely faster, but they probably wouldn’t hold the two whitewater kayaks that were strapped inside the Flex.)

So, just how well does the Flex do its duty as family and vacation hauler? We’ll provide a full road test soon, but let's peek in the logbook for the staff’s raw, first impressions:

"Great vacation car. The 2nd row has loads of legroom, 3rd row is roomy enough for adults."

"Wide comfy couch-like front seats, but headrest is intrusive."

"Adjustable pedals are no substitute for a telescoping wheel—pedals too close, wheel too far."

"Polarizing looks. Some call it a Scion xB xL or Maxi Clubman."

"Wonderful access with large door openings and low step-in."

"Car swallows ten-foot-long lumber when folding front passenger and rear seats down."

"Automatic rear hatch is slow."

"No match for the agile Honda Odyssey but trumps the Ford Explorer."

"Car is large but height fools you into thinking it’s smaller."

"Drives well, but I still like the (Saturn) Outlook better."

"Nicest Ford product in a while."

"Rides well and is quite quiet."

"Lots of buttons on center stack, and I keep grabbing the temperature knob instead of volume."

"A nice car overall, but don’t confuse it for a minivan—it doesn’t have the cargo volume."

Overall, other than some detail complaints, our impressions of the Flex are pretty favorable. But this is a crowded segment, and as the above references to the Saturn Outlook and Honda Odyssey indicate, there are some really good family haulers out there. We’ll report on exactly how the Flex stacks up in the November issue, along with the redesigned Honda Pilot.

Read our First Drive report on the Ford Flex.

—Tom Mutchler

Safe! - Acadia, Enclave, Outlook, Traverse top safety picks

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has awarded the Buick Enclave, Chevrolet Traverse, GMC Acadia, and Saturn Outlook its Top Safety Pick designation for exemplary performance in frontal offset, side, and rear crash tests. To be eligible for this distinction, a vehicle also has to have standard stability control.

These corporate siblings are highly rated by Consumer Reports. We liked their combination of ride, handling, smooth powertrain, and space efficiency. With these new crash-test results, the Acadia and Outlook now earn our top-level recommendation, which means they performed well in CR's tests and have average or better reliability. The Enclave is not recommended because we do not have adequate reliability data yet. The Traverse goes on sale in the fall.

The Acadia and its siblings received top scores in the Institute’s frontal-offset  and side crash tests, and also received top marks for whiplash protection based on the design of their head restraints. The Institute provides a detailed breakdown, rating injury measures for head/neck, torso, leg/pelvis, overall head protection, and structure/safety cage. In all instances for front and side, these SUVs earn the Institute’s highest rating of good.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) also awarded the vehicles five stars in both their front- and side-crash tests. The NHTSA evaluations are less severe than those performed by the Insurance Institute, but they are considered a valuable measure of safety belt and air bag performance.

The vehicles scored four stars in rollover resistance in NHTSA’s test of rollover propensity, a good rating for an SUV.

Learn more about how the Institute and NHTSA perform their evaluations in “Crash Test 101.” And see the tests in action by choosing from the more than 250 crash test videos produced with IIHS.

—Eric Evarts

Small SUV crash tests - New Top Safety Picks

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has named six small SUVs Top Safety Picks: the Volkswagen Tiguan, Mitsubishi Outlander, Ford Escape, Mazda Tribute, Mercury Mariner, and Nissan Rogue.

To qualify for this accolade, the six got the Institute's top rating of Good in offset frontal and side crash tests, plus an evaluation of rear crash protection. They also all offer electronic stability control as standard equipment. The Mercury Mariner and the Mazda Tribute are twins to the Ford Escape; the test results also apply to the hybrid versions of these models.

The Honda CR-V, Honda Element, and Subaru Forester are also Top Picks in this class based on earlier tests.

IIHS rates cars in an offset frontal crash that is more severe than U.S. government crash test standards and more closely mimics real-world accidents. Side crash tests are conducted to simulate a vehicle being hit in the side by a tall, heavy SUV. Vehicles are rated on a scale of Good, Acceptable, Marginal, and Poor. (Learn more in "Crash Test 101.")

Other small SUVs, including the Suzuki Grand Vitara, Jeep Patriot, Chevrolet Equinox, Pontiac Torrent, Jeep Patriot, and Jeep Wrangler received lower grades in one of the crash measures. The Wrangler offered Poor protection in a side crash when tested without its optional side air bags.

If you're in the market for a small SUV, we recommend you look for one that has Good crash scores from both the IIHS and the government, as well as one that performed well in our testing and has good predicted reliability.

Of the IIHS Top Picks, we recommend the Honda CR-V and Element, Mitsubishi Outlander, and Subaru Forester. The Forester is our Top Rated small SUV.

Read our recent Small SUV and Sporty SUV tests covering many of the models featured here, including the Tiguan featured in the embedded CR road test video. Crash test videos based on the latest tests will be posted next week.

View more than 250 crash test videos.

—Eric Evarts

Personal picks: Small SUVs, part 2

Continuing our staff's personal insights into the August-issue small SUVs test group. (Read: Personal Picks: Small SUVs, part 1.)

Gabe Shenhar: I really like the new turbocharged Subaru Forester 2.5XT Limited. The car marks a big step forward over the original Forester, which is not something that can be said for every redesign these days. The new Forester provides effortless acceleration, a great ride, lots of room, a quiet cabin and lots of agility. As soon as I brought it home for the first time, I showed it to my wife and made sure it fit in the garage. It would really make a nice family vehicle for us, with enough rear seat room for two growing boys—which wasn’t the case with the original Forester. But after we finished testing it, I realized that it only got 20 mpg overall (on premium to boot). The excitement suddenly waned, which is too bad.

That brings me back to the Toyota RAV4. I’ve always had a soft spot for the RAV4, ever since it pioneered the segment in 1996. Although the design is two years old now, the current generation is still a standout. It looks good, rides and handles well, has many thoughtful interior features, and is roomy inside without being bulky. Even with the V6, I won’t have to feel guilty -- it gets 22 mpg on regular. Being quick, smooth and quiet, is the icing on the cake. So, if I were shopping for one of these today, the RAV6, as we call it here, would be my top contender.

Mike Quincy: I’m in three-row seat mode right now. Every car I look at or envision taking a permanent spot in my garage has to have this feature. Why? Well, like most households, if Mom’s happy, everybody’s happy. (Likewise, if Mom’s not happy… well, you get the picture.) Mom’s not too happy right now. See, we have two small boys who like to bring friends with them when they go places. My wife drives a Camry sedan. To keep everybody safe, all the kids ride in the backseat. Hence, with two boys and only three seating positions, only one can bring a friend. Also, Mom wants a dog. And Mom wants to build a garden. And Mom likes to buy antiques. So we need a vehicle that does everything: carry people, dogs, stuff. We don’t need to go off-road and, with a set of winter tires, we don’t need AWD. And, like everybody these days, it has to get good fuel economy and can’t break the bank. She’d love a Toyota Highlander Hybrid, but they’re simply too pricey (nearly $40,000 with the third row).

What’s the best choice here? The Mazda5. It’s not a minivan, it’s not an SUV, and it’s not a wagon. But it can get done what Mom wants in her hectic life. Even a top-level Grand Touring model tops out at $24,000 (thousands less than most in the small SUV group when popularly equipped), and still gets 23 mpg overall. Exciting to drive? Well, she’s been driving that Camry for several years, which isn’t exactly a carnival on wheels, so the Mazda5 will likely feel like a new beginning. So, as it turns out, this isn’t exactly my personal pick, but it’s the pick for domestic harmony.

For more on this small SUVs group, read the road tests and watch our review videos.

Personal picks: Small SUVs

In the August issue, we tested several right-sized SUVs that represent where many buyers are heading: smaller and more fuel efficient. Among this group, the empirical standout was the redesigned Subaru Forester. It not only bested the other small SUVs in this month's small SUV Ratings (available to subscribers), its turbocharged and nonturbocharged versions also leapfrogged over the six- and four-cylinder versions of the Toyota RAV4.

We also tested the new Nissan Rogue and the four-cylinder Mitsubishi Outlander, plus we evaluated a couple old-school SUVs, the Kia Sorento and the redesigned Jeep Liberty.

To look behind the published ratings and road test, we offer personal insights on our picks for downsized SUVs:

Tom Mutchler: Even though I’m a big fan of wagons and hatchbacks, the Forester makes all of those cars in Subaru’s line-up redundant. (Same goes for the less-than-optimized Tribeca SUV.) The Forester has more room inside than an Outback wagon, and if you forego alloy wheels and heated seats, it’s less money than the smaller Outback Sport. You’re not giving up much in fuel economy or driving characteristics, either.

The Forester appeals to me because it is a refreshingly honest car. It stresses substance— like fantastic visibility, the ride/handling balance, interior space, and crash-test results— over flash. No, it doesn’t get the fuel economy of a Toyota RAV4 and it’s not as well trimmed as a Honda CR-V. But I’ll take the savings and get the more practical Forester.

One more thing: this month’s test revealed an overlooked player in this market, the Mitsubishi Outlander. It got me to the airport in an early morning snowstorm without any drama, and the huge interior easily swallowed a large laundry dryer, aided by its clever little tailgate. The steering is tuned toward sporty, and the newly-available four-cylinder is willing (if not overly powerful). While it’s likely to depreciate more than a three-year-old RAV4/ CR-V/Forester, the Outlander could make be a used-car bargain down the road.

Rick Small: The popular small SUV market is growing rapidly. These right-sized vehicles have many advantages over the older truck-based models, such as better ride, handling, and fuel efficiency. They’re also very roomy for their size; folding rear seats only add to there usefulness. Some offer third-row seats but they are mostly for small kids. The new Subaru Forester is larger and much improved over the previous model. The turbo version is more responsive and better equipped than the base, but gets two fewer mpg. Subarus all come with standard AWD, so they get less mpg than most base vehcles in this class —almost all competing models also offer FWD version. The Honda CR-V is reliable and gets better fuel economy. But I need a 3,500-pound towing capacity, which leaves the four-cylinder models off my list. The Hyundai Santa Fe and Toyota RAV4 offer V6s that will tow and the new Mitsubishi Outlander has a standard V6 that can also tow the weight I haul. Of these, the Outlander is the sportiest of the group and it fits my 6' 3" frame the best as well—although my wife complains about the lack of leg room. The RAV4 is a good choice and gets good mileage even with the V6 (22 mpg), but the driver’s seat is a bit small and flat for me. My favorite, though, is still the Nissan Murano (admittedly a bit more expensive). But it’s quicker, bigger and sportier than most of these and still manages to get 19 mpg. The new redesign is not quite as sporty as the old one, but it rides better and has more safety features.

For more on this small SUVs group, read the road tests and watch our review videos.