Comparing the Rav4 and Grand Vitara - Toyota RAV4 Forums
Shopping and Test Drives Discuss the various issues that come into play when you are test driving, comparing and pricing the RAV4 with other SUV's.

User Tag List

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
#1 (permalink) Old 06-17-2006, 01:24 PM
gv6onr
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Comparing the Rav4 and Grand Vitara

I came to this site to see how Rav4 owners viewed the latest Grand Vitara. A search of this forum for "Grand Vitara", turns up plenty of harsh criticism. In particular, one moderator seems to watch for and utters unfair comments at any mention of the latest GV. So I thought it might help people who are interested in both, to give my thoughts on these cars.


Styling

For instance, it seems popular here to claim the 06 GV copies the styling of the Rav4. A blend of Rav4 and Vue. At least the Vue connection makes sense, since Suzuki designed the Vue for GM, and the GV and Vue share some parts and structure.

But copy the Rav4? Gimme a break. Where the GV differs from the Vue, the heritage can be seen in older Vitaras, not the Rav4. Check out the headlights, clamshell hood, and hood vents if you don't believe me.

Speaking of copying, who first launched a compact suv, Suzuki or Toyota? Hmm? Suzuki was in this market LONG before Toyota and in fact makes large numbers of a variety of small 4wd's. What about the third seat? Ever considered that Toyota copied Suzuki's XL-7 in putting a third seat in the Rav4? Seems to me the evidence is that if anyone's copying, it's Toyota copying Suzuki, not the other way around. So let's see some restraint on this Rav4-centric nonsense about Suzuki copying the Rav4.

As long as a car's not ugly, like an Aztek or Hummer, I don't care much. It's entirely subjective, of course. People thought their '62 Pontiacs were as dazzling as people think their Rav4's are. The new Rav4 looks a bit better to me than the GV. The hood line of the GV slopes so steeply it makes the whole thing look bent, and the hindquarters look a bit bulbous. I think it would benefit from a pinstripe, but maybe I'm just old school. A lot of people think the new GV is the sharpest looking of the cuv's, new Rav4 included.

Months ago as I watched for the new GV on the roads, I was always doing doubletakes that invariably turned out to be Rav4's. But now that there really are '06 GV's out there, there's no confusing them with any Rav4. They look strikingly different, especially the rear quarter panel and taillights. If someone put Lexus badging on it, and showed it to some unwitting observers, I suspect they'd fall for it.

The only other things I'll say about the styling is that I'm sure glad the GV's dashboard looks nothing like the Rav4's, and I think headlights should be confined to the front of a vehicle. We'll see which looks better in 10 years.


Mileage/Engine

Much has been made of the GV's crude engine and poor mileage.

Although the GV's and Rav4's epa highway ratings are, respectively, 30 and 36mpg (cdn), users are reporting in the low 20's for both. The Rav4 has perhaps an edge of 1-2mpg.

Usually this is blamed on the GV's "outdated" engine. Well, for the price of a GV, it's probably a pretty good engine. I might rather have a known-good engine than a fancy expensive new one whose long-term reliability is harder to guess. And the extra horsepower? Well, that will do you a lot of good given traffic congestion these days. Bragging rights, I suppose, if you depend on that sort of thing.

But I think the GV's engine is getting a bad rap on the mileage. The Rav4's longer body means better streamlining at highway speeds. And the fact the GV is always in AWD will cost mileage not lost by the Rav4 which typically is in 2wd. Now, I'd prefer the GV be able to be put into 2wd, but on the other hand, there is a safety advantage to being in AWD all the time.

So I think the GV's engine is getting far too much blame for the (slightly) inferior mileage compared to the Rav4. In fact, if you could isolate those other factors, it may not be any less efficient!

No defending inferior mileage on environmental grounds. But if you look at the difference in purchase price, plus the financing of that difference, the Rav4 will never make up the difference in gas expense. It's maybe $50-200 per year depending on how much you drive. That won't even cover the interest on the price difference.


Reliability/Quality

It has been stated here quite confidently that the Grand Vitara has an inferior repair record. As I researched buying the new GV, I was careful to check this out, and the concern that it is a new model. What I found is that the GV has had an average or better record, and that the years that were new designs did not have higher repair numbers. You would expect new models to have inferior repair records, but the Vitara/Grand Vitara seems to have not suffered from this.

Backing that up is the record of the new GV. It has been sold, all over the world, for about 10 months now. The incidence of manufacturing defects, recalls and repairs is extremely low. They are low for any car, let alone a brand-new design.

The previous GV's were a North American-only product, and were built in Ontario. Their reliability record may or may not be related to the history yet to be accumulated by the new GV. The new GV sold in North America is made only in Japan. So where is the Rav4 made? Not to say Toyota doesn't have great build quality in its North American products, but there's still that fundamental difference between them which does not support sneering at the GV. There's even a good chance the new GV could turn out to be the better designed and asssembled of the two.

I was fascinated to learn the Suzuki factory matches tires and rims so they cancel out each other's variances before the combination is balanced. The result of such efforts is a silky-smooth absence of vibration.


Resale Value

Resale value can't be separated from purchase cost. When I compared new top-of-the-line GV's and Rav4's, I found a difference of nearly $10,000 (cdn). Even if that's innacurate, there's a huge difference. But there's more. While I'd expect to pay near msrp for a Rav4, we paid about $2500 below msrp for our GV JLX-L. So that makes the difference even larger. Oh, and don't forget to add in the taxes on the difference.

So when you compare resale values in 10 years, you are fooling yourself if you don't factor this difference into your calculation. You also need to factor in the compounding interest on both the purchase price difference, and the taxes on that difference. For two vehicles that are similar enough to invite cross-shopping, that's a huge difference in cost.

It may be different in various markets, but the resale values of old Vitaras don't support the contention that they are worthless. I had reason to compare 1990-1993 Vitaras against Nissan Pathfinders of the same years. The Vitaras had lower prices, but not by much. If you factor in how much more the Pathfinders cost to begin with, the Vitaras actually held their value better. And the Pathfinders values have stood up pretty well. If you want to see a genuine resale value disaster, check out the Explorer.


Automotive Reviews

Comparisons by car reviewers are quoted here rating the GV below other cuv's. Reading the reasons usually reveals the GV is marked down because of the mileage, stiff ride, unwanted heavy duty components etc. Ok, so it's more suited to rough use. Which makes it less targeted for the Rav4's market. It doesn't mean the GV is inferior, it just means that at some point you're comparing apples and oranges.

Why wouldn't some other comparison knock the Rav4 because it doesn't have a low range, or a frame reinforcement, or as great a towing capacity, or the springs are too mushy for rough going?

Indeed, to quote from a post in the Edmunds car discussion forum,
http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.efd635c!make=Suzuki&model=Grand%20Vitara&ed_makei ndex=.efd635c

"The Grand Vitatra was voted the best Suv under $40,000 by TSN'S Motoring, And Voted Best New SUV by AJAC and Canadian Driver says it is a must see for anyone considering a compact SUV."

Now, those comparisons were done before the '07 Rav4 came out. But the GV was beaten on the TSN's contest for best new '06 suv only by the Range Rover and the Mercedes M-class. Not bad for half the price.

Some have claimed here the GV is noisy, and that the steering is wonky. No, it ain't a Lexus. And it didn't cost as much as a Lexus either. I'm planning to add some sound insulation. As for the steering, ours is perfect. Tracks perfectly, tight turning radius.


Sales

I've seen a post that some prospective GV buyers have been told the '06's have sold out, and they will have to wait for the '07's in September. When I bought ours, there was no demo unit to test drive, and we were told it would take 6-8 weeks to deliver our choice. Given that Suzuki increased production of the new GV by at least 40% over what they expected, this hardly points to an ugly duckling.


What I Don't Like About the '06 GV

Well, the cargo area is a bit small. For off-roading, it needs about 1" more clearance and proper skid plates. The North American spec lacks: windshield tint band, remote filler flap release, center rear seat armrest, mudflaps. The carpet is cheesy. Thanks to the marketing wonks, the low range is inexplicably available only with an automatic transmission and 17" rims. While the automatic is a 5-speed, it cannot be put in 2nd gear for engine braking downhill in either range. There is almost no selection of alternate tires for the 17" rims, and such large rims are not suited to off-roading. To get the low range, you also have to pony up for a power 2-way sunroof, heated leather seats, keyless entry and start, homelink, automatic a/c, fancy radio with 7 speakers etc.

The traction control system will deactivate to lower stress on the drivetrain just when you might badly need it, like climbing a steep hill with traction only on one or two wheels. I believe the people who review these cars test traction control on an "elephants foot" obstacle course that's built on otherwise flat ground. The mileage readout is dumbly executed.

Dealerships are scarce, and in my case, too far away. They do, however give me a loaner even to drop it off for an oil change.


What I Like About the GV

To start with, there aren't bazillions of them running around, like the new Rav4.

No rattles or squeaks. Except the spare tire cover when you slam the hatch.

It BEGS to be driven fast around corners. Standard full set of airbags and stabilty control. Spacious passenger accomodations. Lots of cupholders that will accept anything. Excellent controls, and a very high-quality interior.

It's incredibly sure-footed in bad conditions. When others are stuck in deep snow, and mounting chains or shovelling, I just drive around them and keep going. We regularly drive up steep, unplowed logging roads, and I never got it stuck or needed to use chains. It has an even weight distribution both front-to-back and side-to-side, which means the tires are evenly and minimally loaded. This also benefits road handling. Although some other vehicles got as far as I did this winter, no one driving anything ever got farther.

It fell short of the Forester in crash testing. It got one less star, but the actual numbers were closer than the star rating would suggest. However if you consider that the GV's stability control will help you avoid about 50% of accidents to begin with, I'll take the GV.

Lastly, it's just so well put together it's not funny. Built like a brick sh*thouse.


Conclusion

For similar models, the Rav4 appears to sport more standard features. But not a lot more, and at any given price point, the GV is better equipped. Don't forget you can't get a low range for any price on a Rav4.

Bottom line is that the new Rav4 may be "better" (in a very broad meaning of the word) than the new GV. But if it is indeed better, it's not by far, and it may be just a matter of what market you're talking about. It wouldn't be better for me because I actually use a low range.

If, however, you take the next step, which includes price in the mix, and translates into "value", it's hard to claim the Rav4 is better, or even equal to the GV. The lack of respect for the GV expressed by some here, threatens to backfire and make them look ill-informed and unreasonable. Which contradicts the assumption that smart people buy Rav4's. They're both excellent vehicles, so no one needs to be defensive. Ok?

Thanks for listening.
 
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 (permalink) Old 06-17-2006, 02:51 PM
woody
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Excellent critiques-a pleasure to read. Thanks for taking the time and sharing. I only know Suzuki is a distinguished company with a long history, friends who own (older) Vitaras are very happy, and the new one (which I think does bear a passing resemblance to the Rav) is a very attractive vehicle And their commercials aren't bad either. Again, thanks for the education.
 
#3 (permalink) Old 06-17-2006, 09:16 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 214
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
as to the bad comments about the GV what do you expect this is a toyota board
thanks for the story the deal for me is after 5 toyotas not one has EVER let me down not one new used dont matter change the oil and your set
kc2hje is offline  
#4 (permalink) Old 06-17-2006, 10:16 PM
Advanced Member
Country: flyingn's Flag is: United States
 
flyingn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: cinnaminson NJ
Posts: 6,344
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
I have a Suzuki XL7 besides the Rav and LOVE it, Its a fun, reliable tough suv no doubt.

I love the new GV. It was second choice to the rav.. I love the looks and interior every bit as much as the rav.. The 2.7 Zook 6 is a fine engine. I get 24 mpg on the highway with my XL7. 7 passenger real 4wd full frame turck. and 5.13 gears.. No too bad..

BTW the gv has nothing in common wth the Vue. I think you are thinking of the 07 XL7 with IS based off that platform

========
Defender of the 4 banger!!!!

http://mustangattitude.com/cgi-bin/s.../2007_00010_01 <= website!
flyingn is offline  
#5 (permalink) Old 06-17-2006, 10:46 PM
rav4er
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Good review.
Do you own either SUV?
All North American and Aussie Rav4s are built in Japan.
The GV never sold well in the compact 4WD sector in Australia.
Sales of the new Rav4 is miles ahead of its competitors - Forester, X-trail and CRV.
I guess the main reason is that the GV lacks refinement in its drive for both the 4cyl and 6cyl engines.
 
#6 (permalink) Old 06-19-2006, 01:23 AM
gv6onr
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Thanks for the sensible responses. It makes Rav4 fans and owners look like the sort of people I would expect them to be.

To answer rav4er's question, I thought I provided enough clues that we have an '06 Grand Vitara, JLX-L, which means the fanciest one with the leather seats and low range. I don't even like leather seats, but we couldn't get the low range without them. Thanks for clearing up where the North American Rav4's are made. The Forester is also made in Japan.

I didn't test drive the Rav4. My original choice actually was the X-Trail, but we waited to see if the new GV would have a low range. In fact, we didn't test drive anything. The first time we drove a GV was when we took ours home from the dealership. I thoroughly researched it on the Internet, and used CarCostCanada to set the pricing. Good Idea! The only thing that surprised me about it was how exactly it was as I had been expecting after doing the research. Anyway, my wife, who was left out of the selection process, likes it, as does anyone who spends any time in it. People who drive it, sit there chanting "very nice", "very nice"....

There are bazillions of Rav4's running around Vancouver, Canada, where I live. Sometimes it seems like you're seeing several a minute. New ones too, so the sales must be spectacular. Practically from the day the new one came out, I was seeing more of them than '06 GV's.

Probably you people can tell me if the shorter version of the new Rav4 is sold in Canada. I thought I saw one the other day, but it's hard to tell.

As for what the new GV and the Vue/Equinox/Torrent/XL7 have in common... If you look at pictures of the dashboards of all except the XL7, they look almost interchangable except for cosmetic differences. Steering wheels too. Usually this would indicate a lot of the understructure is in common. There were huge arguments about this when the new GV came out. It almost seemed like Suzuki would rather no one know the GV shared parts with the /GM "Thetas". What it boiled down to is the the GV is a very heavily modified version of the Thetas.

The XL7 has a different dashboard, and also differs from the other Thetas by having a frame reinforced underbody. Not as much "frame" as the new GV, but the other Thetas have no frame at all. So the new XL7, despite being made in the CAMI plant with the Thetas, is itself not a "pure" Theta.

Regarding the refinement of the new RAV4 compared to the new GV, I guess you should expect that, given how much more the Rav4 costs. I hope it has more acoustic insulation,which can make a huge difference in quality impression. Bear in mind that it also benefitted from another 6 months of automobile development by coming to the market that much after the GV.

Anyway, I didn't want to crash your party, but it's like overhearing people saying uncomplimentarly things about you. Had to respond. Thanks for listening, and the welcome, although I may not stay long at the party.
 
#7 (permalink) Old 06-20-2006, 01:39 AM
giulianr
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
I test drove both. The GV is an excellent choice for the $$$. In my opinion, the GV is much more of a tough truck than the Rav4. That being said, the GV is also geared for this purpose. The Rav4 is much more suited to road use. I would not even think of taking it off road. The vehicle would not get stuck per se but without the proper shielding, you WILL leave parts behind. Just go under the Rav and look for yourself. The GV interior is well laid out and other manufacturers could learn a lot from the new interior. I purchased the Rav V6 for its sheer ability to get me where I need to go (on road) without any sweat. I recently loaded the vehicle with 900 lbs of cement and I thought that it might complain. No chance. I think the Rav sort of laughed and wanted to send the cement out the back window. Yes I drove very easy once I realized that it did not care about the additional weight (my suprise). So, in all I really liked the GV and would purchase it if my use was rough terrain or off road. If you want to stay on road, I felt the Rav was the better performer although not perfect.
 
#8 (permalink) Old 06-20-2006, 01:54 AM
gv6onr
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
giulianr,

Sounds like fair comment. The Rav4 must be pretty amazing on the highway.

The only thing I'd find fault with is your description of the Rav4 having a vulnerable underbody. This could be taken to indicate the GV's underbody is not so vulnerable.

I haven't seen under the Rav4, but I've spend enough time looking under the GV, and straightening a PLASTIC "skid plate" to say that it strikes me as very vulnerable. The exhaust system looks very rugged, but there are other things like the unprotected aluminum transfer case. And some evap stuff that was tacked under the North American GV just where you need breakover clearance. And dragging the rear control arms on deep ruts in icy snow or dirt. And the silly vulnerable rear licence plate bezel. Nothing to brag about, I'm afraid.

One of the on-line truck magazines tested the GV off-road against things like the Exterra, and apparently the GV came away with the bottom somewhat damaged. They also wrecked one of those unsuited 17" rims.
 
#9 (permalink) Old 06-20-2006, 02:43 PM
Senior Member
Country: mkaresh's Flag is: United States
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 224
Thanks: 1
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
As someone else said, the GV is not related to the VUE. Also, Suzuki did not develop the VUE.

Compared to the RAV4, the GV has less steering feel and leans more in turns. The GV's performance is closer to the RAV4 4-cylinder than the V6.

The big advantage of the GV is that it is a true SUV with an available low range.

My site's pages for each, with links to my full reviews and most common price comparisons:

http://www.truedelta.com/models/Vitara.php (RAV4 most common comparison)

http://www.truedelta.com/models/RAV4.php (GV 5th most common)

Sorry, only U.S. price comparisons at this time.

www.truedelta.com
Reliability, prices
mkaresh is offline  
#10 (permalink) Old 06-20-2006, 02:54 PM
Senior Member
Country: mkaresh's Flag is: United States
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 224
Thanks: 1
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Forgot to mention that I'm already collecting reliability data on both of these models. Might have some results around the end of the year, depending on how many people participate.

www.truedelta.com
Reliability, prices
mkaresh is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome