Seeking Advice on a Mid-Sized AWD SUV (Budget ~ $15K)

Lsimonn on 02/09/2018 - 08:49
Last edited 02/09/2018 - 09:10 by 1 other user

Hi guys,

I'm in the market for a mid-sized SUV AWD. Auto, as my partner can only drive auto unfortunately.
Budget is $15k (may be able stretch to $20k), so looking at an early 2010s model.

I've narrowed down my options to the below, leaning towards Toyota Rav4 because I've previously driven Toyotas (reliable and cheap to service), but would be keen to hear if anyone has experience with any of the below and would/ would not recommend? Or if there are any other cars that I should be looking into?

  • Toyota Rav4
  • Nissan X-Trail
  • Honda CRV
  • Subaru Forrester

Looking for an SUV that is:

  • Reliable
  • Cheap to service
  • Generous boot space
  • Not a massive gas guzzler!

Thanks in advance!

Automotive

Comments

  • Masterpupil on 02/09/2018 - 09:02

    All of those are good options.

    Had friends with RAV4. Solid choice barely anything goes wrong. Engines are underpowered IMO if you get a petrol engine. Probably applies to all of these options.

    Had an X-Trail since 2013. Bought new. Over 100K on the clock now. Turbo diesel 6 speed manual.

    Literally nothing unusual has occured. Servicing very reasonable. On third set of tires. Very economical. Huge boot.

    Hit a roo with it once, only damage was a crack in front bar so small that you'd barely notice.

    I believe it's 5 star safety rated. Have had to avoid at least two accidents in it, handled well in those circumstances.

  • Melb69 on 02/09/2018 - 09:24

    RAV4. Ticks all the boxes. Just get it looked at and check service books and if high Km the belts are done.

  • [Deactivated] on 02/09/2018 - 09:24

    What do you need an SUV for? It seems that all the cars you listed have no advantages over an equivalent wagon, probably have less space, and use more fuel. Unless you're going to get a proper SUV, I suggest you buy a car, which for a low budget like $20k, will likely be better, cheaper to run and generally superior. Something like a Subaru outback would be a better solution than anything you have mentioned.

    *I drive a 4wd, but I take it offroad on occasion, and for my purposes it is better than a wagon. It doesn't sound like you need an SUV.

    • simonn on 02/09/2018 - 10:34

      Looking to do some frequent off-roading, which is why I'm after a AWD SUV, but the car will mainly be used for city driving.
      I will have a look into the Subaru outback!

      • [Deactivated] on 02/09/2018 - 11:07
        -3

        You can’t off-road in any of the cars you mentioned.

        The cheapest cars that can actually go off-road would be an old Jeep Wrangler, A Suzuki Sierra, or maybe an old Pajero. But in your budget you’re going to be looking at quite an old car if you want it capable of going off road.

        A regular wagon will go anywhere the cars you have mentioned will go.

        • CLoSeR on 02/09/2018 - 11:23
          +2

          You certainly can in a Forester, I mean nothing too serious but there is a reason they are popular in regional Australia.

        • [Deactivated] on 02/09/2018 - 12:52

          @Spackbace: That's probably the only SUV within the OP's budget (that's not ancient) that has some semblance of offroad capability. That or a Wrangler.

        • whooah1979 on 02/09/2018 - 16:33

          the subaru legacy is as urban as an awd can get. it didn't stop this guy going offroading with the help of few a mods.
          https://youtu.be/DslXqIfWigs

        • [Deactivated] on 02/09/2018 - 16:42

          @whooah1979: You (and the guy in the video), don't know what going off road is. You can't go off-road in a Subaru properly. It doesn't have the clearance, it can't fit the tyres, it doesn't have a proper low range, it doesn't have a diff lock. It'll get you down a dirt road.

        • CLoSeR on 02/09/2018 - 17:03

          @Burnertoasty: The Forester is standard with 220mm clearance; Landcruiser for comparison is 225mm. So yes it does have the clearance.

        • whooah1979 on 02/09/2018 - 17:04

          @Burnertoasty:

          You (and the guy in the video), don't know what going off road is.

          That is your opinion.

          The link provided shows that a Subaru Legacy with mods was driven on an off-road trail called hell’s revenge in Moab Utah.
          https://youtu.be/DslXqIfWigs

        • [Deactivated] on 02/09/2018 - 17:12
          -1

          @CLoSeR: Yeah, but it doesn't have anything else it needs. It's not debatable, a Subaru Forester is not an offroad vehicle. Saying otherwise is ignorant and foolish.

        • [Deactivated] on 02/09/2018 - 17:14

          @whooah1979: That's great. But that's not proper offroading. It's a trail with some light rock crawling.

        • whooah1979 on 02/09/2018 - 17:22

          @Burnertoasty:

          many have tried and many have failed this light rock. there is even a few a wrangler among them.
          https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=hell%27s+reveng…

        • Euphemistic on 02/09/2018 - 18:09

          @Burnertoasty: most people consider dirt tracks as off road. An SUV with a proper drivetrain that properly sends drive to all wheels and has reasonable gruond clearance will do a lot of dirt trails.

          I used to drive a falcon wagon and it managed light duty dirt trails more than it should. The forester I had went ok too provided I chose tracks carefully and didn’t expect miracles.

        • [Deactivated] on 02/09/2018 - 18:16

          @Euphemistic: Exactly. These SUVs mentioned won’t get you any farther than a Falcon in gas.

        • [Deactivated] on 02/09/2018 - 18:17

          @whooah1979: You can’t be seriously trying to intimate that a lifted Subaru is more capable than a Wrangler.

        • whooah1979 on 02/09/2018 - 18:33
          -1

          @Burnertoasty:

          I’m doing no such thing.

          I’ve provided a link showing a Subaru sedan with mods being operated in an environment that I consider off-road. It’s up to op and the other readers to form their own opinions on what they consider off-road.
          https://youtu.be/DslXqIfWigs
          https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=hell%27s+reveng…

        • [Deactivated] on 02/09/2018 - 18:56

          @whooah1979: No, you’re cherry picking examples. That Subaru in your video is very clearly on different terrain to the videos you posted of real 4*4s getting stuck. They might even be part of the same trail, but the Subaru is not tackling the tricky parts of the track and those 4wds are. You’re misrepresenting a car’s ability for the sake of argument. You well know that a Subaru is not a capable off-roader.

        • whooah1979 on 02/09/2018 - 19:12

          @Burnertoasty:

          The keywords used for the YouTube search is generic. Hell’s revenge fail. Hell’s revenge Subaru. I’ve no control over the search result nor what vids yt chooses to link.

          You’re welcome provide links that shows Subaru can’t be used for off-road.

        • Euphemistic on 02/09/2018 - 21:43

          @Burnertoasty: my point was more that where I comfortably took a Falcon and a Forester was probably more challenging than a lot of owners would think their ‘real 4wd’ was capable of.

          A lot of people think off road means no bitumen.

        • TheOneWhoKnocks on 02/09/2018 - 22:35

          Wow, a civilised argument on OzBargain. Carry on.

        • [Deactivated] on 03/09/2018 - 09:59

          @whooah1979: You’re not answering the question, you’re just throwing strawmen right and left in the vain pursuit of arguing for arguments sake. You and I can both clearly see that the Subaru is driving over tame parts of the trail, and avoiding the tough bits which cause the real 4wds to fail. To even portray any Subaru as a competent off-roader is disingenuous.

    • waterbottled on 02/09/2018 - 11:09
      +2

      SUVs are usually seated higher than sedans/wagons, and it's more comfortable to get in and out of for people who are taller and/or bigger. That's worth it for a lot of people.

      • [Deactivated] on 02/09/2018 - 11:16

        Thank you for informing me that SUVs are higher, I didn't realise.

        • waterbottled on 02/09/2018 - 11:19
          +6

          You asked why OP wanted an SUV. I'm giving you a common reason why many people buy SUVs.

          Smartass.

  • CLoSeR on 02/09/2018 - 09:51
    +1

    Subaru Forester if you really need an AWD; the others don't compare.

  • FoxJump on 02/09/2018 - 10:11

    Look at servicing costs. I think the Toyota and Subaru may have six month services. But if you do it yourself then meh really.

    I've driven my Subaru xv off road and although no Pajero - which I also have now - the subie can get me through some rough ground with a bit of patience. But the six monthly servicing was annoying.

  • Trying2SaveABuck on 02/09/2018 - 11:18

    Rav 4 or Forester i'd probably go the forester but thats just me

  • spackbace on 02/09/2018 - 11:35
    +3

    Throw the Suzuki Grand Vitara on the list

    Proper 4WD (with low range and diff lock) so you can take it out on the beach. Japanese built. Strong enthusiast following based off their really good reliability. Full size spare wheel on the back.

    Autos are a 4-speed box. Bit outdated but reliable. Better than the cvt on the xtrail and forester

    Here's an example

    Paint looks a bit scratched (damn black cars), but will still be under factory 5yr warranty if the servicing has been maintained.

    • Kangal on 02/09/2018 - 12:22
      -1

      CVT is actually the better technology. Provides better performance AND better efficiency AND less weight AND smaller size….if done correctly.

      However, it's almost always used to cheap-out rather than improve over a good manual transmission.

      That 4-Speed Auto on the Vitara is a huge let down, though. It's not better than the Cheap-CVT offerings of the competitors just to correct you there. Otherwise, the rest of your post is on-point and should be considered by OP…unless they really care not for the product, but care for the badge and its "High Yield" properties.

    • TheOneWhoKnocks on 02/09/2018 - 22:38

      Looking at the 2018 model and its still pretty much the same car. In need of a dire refresh.

      EDIT: Seems like theres a facelift coming Q1 2019.

      • spackbace on 02/09/2018 - 22:43
        +1

        I left the brand over a year ago, and we were crying out for a replacement then.

        Once Toyota went soft-roader with no true 4x4, it left the market wide open for Suzuki to dominate with a refreshed Grand Vitara. An SUV under $40k which could go on the beach yet offers comfort and modern safety features would be a popular thing.

        Especially from a Japanese brand, not jeep 😂

  • 2jzzzz on 02/09/2018 - 15:04
    +1

    Mitsi Outlander?

  • Euphemistic on 02/09/2018 - 18:13

    Another vote for a forester or outback. Outlander might do, or an xtrail - just check either of these has some sort of off road or 4wd mode.

  • Euphemistic on 02/09/2018 - 21:46
    +1

    OP, what do you mean by ‘off road’? Gravel roads, fire trails, rough tracks, parking in a paddock, beach, snow trips?

  • mozatihom on 03/09/2018 - 07:45
    +1

    Consider a Mitsubishi Outlander. You could get a ZH model for 10k to early teens. Or a ZK for high teens to 20k. ZJ model was pretty ugly in my books.

  • dust on 03/09/2018 - 09:28

    Why is a manual not an option? It's not like anyone is born knowing how to drive stick?

    (My partner taught me how to drive manual so we could keep her manual car.)

    • Euphemistic on 03/09/2018 - 10:18

      If you want to use the off road capabilities an auto can be better when there is no low range available.

  • TGL on 03/09/2018 - 15:08

    Just sold (trade in) a 2012 Kia Sportage SLi (diesel) for $12 with 84k on the clock. Bought from new and had no problems with it at all. Servicing price was ok and only once a year. Can get 8l/100km out of it. Certainly would recommend it.

  • Bid Sniper on 04/09/2018 - 14:27
    +1

    Subaru XV?

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join