Toyota RAV4 Forums banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
After checking out the specs for various fast SUVs in the market, I found only 4 SUVs with a better power-to-weight ratio than the V6 RAV4. So the next time an X5 4.8i or a Cayenne S pulls up alongside, don't be afraid to make a fight out of it :twisted:

RAV4 V6
Price = Under $25k
269 bhp
3655 lbs (AWD)
3527 lbs (FWD)
lbs/bhp = 13.6 (AWD)
lbs/bhp = 13.1 (FWD)


Trailblazer SS
Price = Around $35k
395 bhp
4700 lbs (AWD - Estimated)
4523 lbs (RWD)
lbs/bhp = 11.9 (AWD)
lbs/bhp = 11.5 (RWD)


G55 AMG
Price = Around $105k
469 bhp
5590 lbs
lbs/bhp = 11.9

Cayenne Turbo
Price = Around $90k
450 bhp
5200 lbs
lbs/bhp = 11.6

Cherokee SRT8
Price = Around $40k
420 bhp
4788 lbs
lbs/bhp = 11.4
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,562 Posts
Not sure what the power-to-weight ratio of the new Forester is, but their XT Limited model with 230HP turbo-charged flat four trumps the V6 RAV's 0-60 by a full second! :shock:

Looks like Subaru gave it a little WRX injection... :?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
karrock said:
Not sure what the power-to-weight ratio of the new Forester is, but their XT Limited model with 230HP turbo-charged flat four trumps the V6 RAV's 0-60 by a full second! :shock:

Looks like Subaru gave it a little WRX injection... :?
You do know that Toyota is now the major stockholder of Subaru...

So who knows what will happen to some of those Subaru models... Hopefully they'll give the Tribeca a face-lift.....
 
P

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
The Forester XT kicks @$$! V6 owners, watch out for this wolf in sheeps clothing. If only the Forester were larger. Hopefully, with Toy a stakeholder, good things will come about for both companies. At leasr someday, a MANUAL trans will return. Imagine a 6 speed manaul on the V6 4WD RAV Sport . Wooohoo!

Or, if they can mimick VWs DSG transmission. Nice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
230 Posts
as a former WRX owner, I can attest to the Subarus quickness, but it comes at a price. The gas mileage is awful...I never saw 20 MPG in combined driving the 3 years I owned the car. Also, you have to deal with the lag, which is probably improved since Subaru upped the displacement to 2.5 liters.

I would (and did) pass up the acceleration of the Subaru for the better gas mileage and refinement of the V6 RAV.
 
H

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
That car and driver article does not say that the subi is more than 1 second faster to 60 mph. The way i read it is 5.9 for the subi, and 6.3 for the RAV-4. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,670 Posts
tankd0g said:
The forester XT is harldy a SUV. There are taller wagons on the market.
And if the forester didn’t look like an aquarium on wheels, it would be a worth while station wagon to consider.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
purduealum91 said:
97itr,

Please update your list to include the Forester XT.
I'm not going to include the Forester XT in rhe list because the Forester XT has a worse power-to-weight ratio than the V6 RAV4.

However, Acceleration is influenced by other factors such as:
- Gearing (especially first gear)
- Power losses from the engine through to the drive wheels
- The ability of a car to launch hard (turbo and AWD helps here)
- Aerodynamics (at tigher speeds)
Etc.

If you look closely at Car & Driver's latest test of the Forester XT and their test of the RAV4 V6, you will notice that the Forester's 0-60 advantage (5.9 vs 6.3) is all within the first 30 mph! This is because with the Forester, asyou apply brake-torque, the boost builds bigtime, resulting in a violent launch that you will never be able to get out of a RAV4. From 30 to 60, the two cars are dead even. Then after 60mph, the Forester starts to pull away again, this time because it's smaller frontal area gives it an aerodynamic edge.

As for the 2003 test of the Forester XT where the Forester avhieved a 5.3 second 0-60, in my opinion, that was was probably a ringer.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,562 Posts
I based my original "full second" on Toyota's official claim of a 0-60 as "less than seven seconds" and C&D's "less than six seconds" in their 5Best Trucks article. Four tenths of a second is still pretty sizeable when you're talking high performance. :wink:

G Man, I guess you really meant to say MotorWeek? Because Car and Driver's review of the Forester XT Limited pegs a 0-60 at 5.9 seconds like hogpowr mentioned.

And of course, the 4x4 V6 RAV Limited pushed 0-60 in 6.3.
 
A

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
[/quote]

If you look closely at Car & Driver's latest test of the Forester XT and their test of the RAV4 V6, you will notice that the Forester's 0-60 advantage (5.9 vs 6.3) is all within the first 30 mph! This is because with the Forester, asyou apply brake-torque, the boost builds bigtime, resulting in a violent launch that you will never be able to get out of a RAV4. From 30 to 60, the two cars are dead even. Then after 60mph, the Forester starts to pull away again, this time because it's smaller frontal area gives it an aerodynamic edge.

As for the 2003 test of the Forester XT where the Forester avhieved a 5.3 second 0-60, in my opinion, that was was probably a ringer.[/quote]

I test-drive the Subaru Forester 2.5XT recently and what you said is true. The car is fast but you can feel the "rush" and "jerk" when you step on it initially. The pick-up in speed is very different from my BMW Z4's V6 engine. Too bad the car is so UGLY, otherwise I would have bought the car.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top