Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Questions on how we spend our money and our time - consumer goods and services, home and vehicle, leisure and recreational activities
User avatar
ladders11
Posts: 758
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 4:20 pm

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby ladders11 » Thu May 18, 2017 9:45 pm

I have seen studies that show reliability differences level off after 6-7 years. Meaning the most and least reliable makes and models need repairs all the same.

I agree with the sentiment that you need to really love something to keep it 15 years. Get what suits you best.

badger42
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 9:01 am

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby badger42 » Thu May 18, 2017 9:45 pm

Dottie57 wrote:
What makes the Subaru's More fun?


It varies by model, but the overall driving experience. AWD that drives like RWD, solid handling, great aftermarket support (any suspension tweaks you could ever want are available). They're fun to drive; Toyotas feel like you're driving a rental car.

talzara
Posts: 263
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 7:40 pm

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby talzara » Thu May 18, 2017 11:05 pm

tcassette wrote:Why is it that I have never seen dash-light.com mentioned in any forums as a reliable gauge of reliability until this thread? I agree that buying a particular model well into its typically 5-year generation life usually will increase your chances of better reliability. However, past performance does not guarantee future performance in vehicle reliability (or investments), especially if the vehicle reliability is compiled over 3 or more generations.


They're car people, and they really don't know how to promote a web site.

There is no way to tell that your car will be reliable. Maybe the 2017 and 2019 cars are reliable, but the 2018 model year is a lemon. The statistics won't be available until after you've bought the car. Even if the model year is generally reliable, you could still end up with a Monday car.

However, some makes and models are more reliable than others. The last year of a design cycle is usually more reliable than the first year of a design cycle. Some redesigns are more conservative than other redesigns.

By taking advantage of the reliability statistics, you can stack the deck in your favor.

talzara
Posts: 263
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 7:40 pm

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby talzara » Thu May 18, 2017 11:41 pm

jharkin wrote:I was thinking the same, I've never heard of that site before today... The data format and the way they break it down is intriguing, but its odd that their charts include a number of long out of production models and even brands that folded. Where are they getting data from?


What's odd about that in a Long Term Quality Index? The brand may be gone, but the cars will still be around until they go to the scrapyard.

For example, look at the Saturn Outlook: http://dashboard-light.com/vehicles/Saturn_Outlook.html

The Saturn brand no longer exists, and the car was only made for 4 model years. However, there are still plenty of Saturn Outlooks around, because the 2010 Outlooks are only 7 years old.

They get the data from mechanical inspections done for car auctions. They're trying to make money by buying cars at auction and selling them at retail, so they have an incentive to get it right. It's probably a better source of defect data than owner surveys.

Of course, this data comes with its own biases. These are cars that people decided to trade in, so they probably have a higher defect rate than cars that are kept by one owner for 20 years.

However, it doesn't look like most people are trading in cars after they have a problem. Otherwise, 15-year-old Toyotas would have the same defect rate as 15-year-old Chryslers. There's still a wide spread in defect rates even at 15 years. Most people probably trade in cars because they want a new car.

EDIT: I dug in a bit. whois shows the domain has been registered since 2012, but poking around the oldest page with a datestamp I can find in the site is a blog post form last December.... all of the individual car reliability pages - even for defunct models like a Saab 900 are dated May-8-17.... Must be the last time they did a mass update. Looking wider, I dont see a reference to it in a number of car forums I browse, and googling for third party references to it only dug up a single news article form an obscure site and one reddit thread from January where people where similarly questioning if it was valid.

Its like the site just appeared overnight with seemingly years of data. I smell something.......


You smell a couple of car people who don't know how to run a web site. They moved their site to a different domain, so it looks like it popped up out of nowhere. In fact, they're on their third domain in three years.

Search for Long Term Quality Index. You'll find plenty of references going back to 2014.

User avatar
jharkin
Posts: 956
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 7:14 am
Location: Boston suburbs

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby jharkin » Fri May 19, 2017 6:19 am

onourway wrote:
It's a pretty straightforward big data analysis. There are all sorts of industries where this kind of thing is happening.
.


Its not the big data analysis I question. I'm aware of how that works, my own corporation bought a big player in the predictive analytics space a couple years back to integrate it in our offers.

What makes me cautious is that the site appeared suddenly and nobody in the car forums or car magazines is talking about it.

User avatar
jharkin
Posts: 956
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 7:14 am
Location: Boston suburbs

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby jharkin » Fri May 19, 2017 6:28 am

CyclingDuo wrote:Bingo!

Cars are like bikes. With bikes - it's not about the bike! It's about the rider. Same with cars.

Outside of cosmetics, more plastic, more computer chips on board - it still gets you from point A to point B. The "experience" may get updated every decade of so, but it's still just a car. If it was no longer able to operate on a road/highway/street - then we can talk about it being obsolete...


Closer, but that's not exactly my point either. I actually love cars and will trade up before they are dead on the side of hte road because I want something new. What I was questioning is why do all these members suddenly think their car will be obsolete overnight because it doesn't have lane keep assist, yet they do not sound like that were equally adamant in 1989 that their car would be obsolete the next year when rear shoulder belts became mandatory, and where not as adamant in 1997 when dual airbags where about to become mandatory, or in 2012 when ESC was about to become mandatory.

Why the sudden urgency now? I would argue that we are well into the tail of the bell curve and these changes are only going to make modest dents in the casualty rates vs the massive improvements from the above (with seatbelts being the biggest of all, such an improvement to survival odds that many people went back and retrofitted them to older vehicles)

User avatar
jharkin
Posts: 956
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 7:14 am
Location: Boston suburbs

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby jharkin » Fri May 19, 2017 6:36 am

lazydavid wrote:
Just wanted to point out that this is the literal definition of survivorship bias. :mrgreen:


Of course, but we are not talking about surviving the plague, the 1918 flu, or the second world war. We are talking about very small incremental improvement in your survival rate.

Look at historical casualty rates (red line) and show me the massive dip in risk from all these intelligent driving systems that makes them a sudden must have:
Image
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_m ... S._by_year

User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Posts: 984
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:40 pm
Location: www.bylo.org in the Great White North
Contact:

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby Bylo Selhi » Fri May 19, 2017 7:06 am

jharkin wrote:What I was questioning is why do all these members suddenly think their car will be obsolete overnight because it doesn't have lane keep assist, yet they do not sound like that were equally adamant in 1989 that their car would be obsolete the next year when rear shoulder belts became mandatory, and where not as adamant in 1997 when dual airbags where about to become mandatory, or in 2012 when ESC was about to become mandatory.

Hyperbolize much? ;)

The pace of technological change is increasing exponentially. No one is saying that means cars will become obsolete "overnight." Rather cars will become technologically dated, if not technologically obsolete, faster than in the past. It's already happening with the latest driver assist options that are being added and refined with each new model. Some of that may be marketing, but at least according to Consumer Reports et al some of it is improving road safety.

Sure you can still drive a 10 or 20 (or 50) year old car legally and for the most part safely. But no matter how good a driver you think you may be, it's doubtful you can drive it as safely as a more recent car, especially in heavy traffic and/or under adverse weather/road conditions. How important that is to you may be quite different than it is for others.

My caveat is that the notion of keeping a car for 15 years may no longer be feasible for those who put a high value on safety. (Some people may also put a high value on creature comforts, "infotainment" and other such "toys." I'm not one of them but I don't try to put down those who do. Chacun à son goût.)

Hence it may no longer be as meaningful to think about reliability over such long time periods as it has been in the past.

silvercertificate
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2016 8:13 pm

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby silvercertificate » Fri May 19, 2017 7:52 am

You have generated a good list of quality cars and you probably will not go wrong with any of them. I went through the same analysis that you are doing now in late 2015. I only seriously considered the CRV and RAV, but I also looked at the Acura and Lexus small and mid size SUVs along with the Pilot, Highlander, and 4Runner. However, after having put over 600k on various Honda vehicles I am fully in the Honda camp.

In late 2015 I bought a 2016 CRV EXL that now has almost 50k miles on it (I drive about 40k per year for work). It really is a great car and I love the fuel economy. I routinely get 32-33 MPG on the highway if I keep the cruise control on at a reasonable speed (65-70mph). I looked at the 2017 CRV recently. I like the new body style and slightly larger size but have no real knowledge about the reliability of the turbo in the new engine options, but I would not be afraid of it. Honestly, I would love to trade for the 2017 CRV but, that doesn't make sense financially. I plan to put about 200k on my CRV then pass it on to one of my kids. Due the number of miles I drive, I will likely not keep my CRV 15 years. However, I certainly think I can get 300k+ miles out of it. I downsized to the CRV from a 2006 Honda Pilot with almost 300k miles on it. That Pilot was a great car and even though I love the increased fuel economy and some of the technology in the 2016 CRV some days I wish I had just kept the Pilot and invested the money in the S&P. My net worth would certainly be higher!

Best of luck!

CyclingDuo
Posts: 381
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2017 9:07 am

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby CyclingDuo » Fri May 19, 2017 8:28 am

Bylo Selhi wrote:My caveat is that the notion of keeping a car for 15 years may no longer be feasible for those who put a high value on safety. (Some people may also put a high value on creature comforts, "infotainment" and other such "toys." I'm not one of them but I don't try to put down those who do. Chacun à son goût.)

Hence it may no longer be as meaningful to think about reliability over such long time periods as it has been in the past.


What actually causes accidents? And what can a car built in 2017 prevent compared to a car built in 2002 (using the 15 year age of a car based on this thread)?

Most of it comes down to a safe operator behind the wheel, obeying the speed limit, driving at a safe speed and distance from other vehicles as conditions dictate, and avoiding any distractions. We actually have a new 2017 filled with all the bells, whistles, and gizmos - all of which are very distracting IMO compared to our 2005 cars.

Of the top 15 causes of car accidents - how many are actually solved by new technology? 8-)

Number one. Distracted drivers are the number one cause of automobile accidents in the US. Cell phone, text message, eating food.

Number two is caused by drunk driving.

Number three is speeding.

Number four is reckless driving (changing lanes too quickly/aggressive driving/speeding).

Number five is rain.

Number six is running red lights.

Number seven is night driving (lack of visibility).

Number eight is design defects.

Number nine is tailgating (dovetails with aggressive driving in number four).

Number ten is wrong way driving/improper turns.

Tied for number ten is teenage drivers.

Number eleven is drugs.

Number twelve is potholes.

Number thirteen is tire blowouts.

Number fourteen is animal crossings.

Number fifteen is construction sites/construction zones with confusion about the cones.

A Safe Operator Behind the Wheel can take most of this list on in spades!

wrongfunds
Posts: 344
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 3:55 pm

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby wrongfunds » Fri May 19, 2017 8:57 am

I like your list and it makes sense. Can you provide the supporting data for it though?

carofe
Posts: 252
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2014 7:21 pm

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby carofe » Fri May 19, 2017 8:59 am

lazydavid wrote:
jharkin wrote:Maybe your younger than me but Ive managed to survive over 40 years on this rock, for over half those years riding in cars that did not even have airbags, anti-lock brakes or rear seat shoulder belts...


Just wanted to point out that this is the literal definition of survivorship bias. :mrgreen:


My father in law has been with a neckache for years because of being rear ended on a car without headrest. You know, better to have all those security features so that you increase your chances of walking out of an accident without problems or lifetime injuries.
I'm still annoyed how in 2016 there are still american cars produced without headrest on the back seats, seriously (Chevr Equinox, e.g.). That's why I buy only foreign cars

carofe
Posts: 252
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2014 7:21 pm

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby carofe » Fri May 19, 2017 9:04 am

CyclingDuo wrote:
Bylo Selhi wrote:My caveat is that the notion of keeping a car for 15 years may no longer be feasible for those who put a high value on safety. (Some people may also put a high value on creature comforts, "infotainment" and other such "toys." I'm not one of them but I don't try to put down those who do. Chacun à son goût.)

Hence it may no longer be as meaningful to think about reliability over such long time periods as it has been in the past.


What actually causes accidents? And what can a car built in 2017 prevent compared to a car built in 2002 (using the 15 year age of a car based on this thread)?

Most of it comes down to a safe operator behind the wheel, obeying the speed limit, driving at a safe speed and distance from other vehicles as conditions dictate, and avoiding any distractions. We actually have a new 2017 filled with all the bells, whistles, and gizmos - all of which are very distracting IMO compared to our 2005 cars.

Of the top 15 causes of car accidents - how many are actually solved by new technology? 8-)

Number one. Distracted drivers are the number one cause of automobile accidents in the US. Cell phone, text message, eating food.

Number two is caused by drunk driving.

Number three is speeding.

Number four is reckless driving (changing lanes too quickly/aggressive driving/speeding).

Number five is rain.

Number six is running red lights.

Number seven is night driving (lack of visibility).

Number eight is design defects.

Number nine is tailgating (dovetails with aggressive driving in number four).

Number ten is wrong way driving/improper turns.

Tied for number ten is teenage drivers.

Number eleven is drugs.

Number twelve is potholes.

Number thirteen is tire blowouts.

Number fourteen is animal crossings.

Number fifteen is construction sites/construction zones with confusion about the cones.

A Safe Operator Behind the Wheel can take most of this list on in spades!


Airbags, ABS and Electronic Stability Control can save you a visit to the hospital when one of those drivers come headed towards your car. The other features are not critical but can help: collision prevention systems, getting out of track alerts, etc... Those can help you to not be the cause of the accident.

User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Posts: 984
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:40 pm
Location: www.bylo.org in the Great White North
Contact:

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby Bylo Selhi » Fri May 19, 2017 9:26 am

CyclingDuo wrote:Most of it comes down to a safe operator behind the wheel, obeying the speed limit, driving at a safe speed and distance from other vehicles as conditions dictate, and avoiding any distractions. We actually have a new 2017 filled with all the bells, whistles, and gizmos - all of which are very distracting IMO compared to our 2005 cars.

Of the top 15 causes of car accidents - how many are actually solved by new technology? 8-)

Number one. Distracted drivers are the number one cause of automobile accidents in the US. Cell phone, text message, eating food...

Many of the safety features introduced in the past few years, e.g. lane departure warnings, smart(er) cruise control, etc. are designed to protect us from "Number one" et al. These sorts of features keep getting updated and improved in each model year. Who knows how much better they will be in a few years time, let alone in 10 or 15 years.

BTW in principle drivers should take more responsibility for their safe behavior behind the wheel. But the reality is that many don't. If the new technologies help me avoid the bozos behind the wheel then I'll be quite happy to upgrade my car more frequently than I have in the past. (I'm speaking as someone who has kept cars for 13, 6 (the Camry lemon), 11 and 12 years respectively. My wife has kept her cars even longer.)

dbr
Posts: 21707
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 9:50 am

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby dbr » Fri May 19, 2017 9:33 am

Are we to assume the decades long decline in fatality and injury rates in automobiles is due to continuous improvement in vehicle and highway engineering or due to continuous improvement in driver behavior?

But here is a report regarding the factor of drunk driving indicating some success in changing driver behavior: https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Pu ... ion/810942

It could be these days there is a reversal in driver behavior associated with distracted driving.

User avatar
jharkin
Posts: 956
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 7:14 am
Location: Boston suburbs

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby jharkin » Fri May 19, 2017 9:38 am

Bylo Selhi wrote:
jharkin wrote:What I was questioning is why do all these members suddenly think their car will be obsolete overnight because it doesn't have lane keep assist, yet they do not sound like that were equally adamant in 1989 that their car would be obsolete the next year when rear shoulder belts became mandatory, and where not as adamant in 1997 when dual airbags where about to become mandatory, or in 2012 when ESC was about to become mandatory.

Hyperbolize much? ;)

The pace of technological change is increasing exponentially. No one is saying that means cars will become obsolete "overnight." Rather cars will become technologically dated, if not technologically obsolete, faster than in the past. It's already happening with the latest driver assist options that are being added and refined with each new model. Some of that may be marketing, but at least according to Consumer Reports et al some of it is improving road safety.

Sure you can still drive a 10 or 20 (or 50) year old car legally and for the most part safely. But no matter how good a driver you think you may be, it's doubtful you can drive it as safely as a more recent car, especially in heavy traffic and/or under adverse weather/road conditions. How important that is to you may be quite different than it is for others.

My caveat is that the notion of keeping a car for 15 years may no longer be feasible for those who put a high value on safety. (Some people may also put a high value on creature comforts, "infotainment" and other such "toys." I'm not one of them but I don't try to put down those who do. Chacun à son goût.)

Hence it may no longer be as meaningful to think about reliability over such long time periods as it has been in the past.



Everyone on this board who says today's tech is a MUST HAVE, but seatbelts where not - when statistics demonstrate that seatbelts made a much bigger impact in safety, is hyperbolizing as well.

We will all have to agree to disagree. People are welcome to live life in constant fear. I choose not too.

EDIT TO ADD:

Im not even trying to argue that these systems have no value. I agree they do. I just dont buy that they are necessarily MORE compelling than larger paradigm shifts in the past like radial tires, seatbelts, airbags, antilock brakes, etc. I find it interesting that for a group that obsesses of statistics and driving out the last 1/10 of 1 percent of cost so many just throw any analysis of data out the window and are willing to start dropping 10s of thousands of extra dollars at features that will reduce your chance of early death from 10 in a billion miles down to... 9 in a billion.
Last edited by jharkin on Fri May 19, 2017 9:56 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Posts: 984
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:40 pm
Location: www.bylo.org in the Great White North
Contact:

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby Bylo Selhi » Fri May 19, 2017 9:47 am

jharkin wrote:Everyone on this board who says todays tech is a MUST HAVE

Who are those people?

but seatbelts where not

Who has claimed otherwise?

We will all have to agree to disagree.

Finally something we can agree on ;)

People are welcome to live life in constant fear. I choose not too.

Again, who are those people?

FWIW I don't live in constant fear. (If I did I wouldn't get into a car in the first place, never mind how old it was or who the driver was.)

Anyway I'm signing off now. I'm leaving on a road trip on this long (in these parts) weekend. Drive safely.

User avatar
jharkin
Posts: 956
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 7:14 am
Location: Boston suburbs

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby jharkin » Fri May 19, 2017 9:58 am

Bylo Selhi wrote:
jharkin wrote:Everyone on this board who says todays tech is a MUST HAVE

Who are those people?

but seatbelts where not

Who has claimed otherwise?



Well, frankly if you feel the need to get a new car every 2 years now because of advancements, but you didnt need a new car in the 80s when there was something new every year then as well - it seems you are saying that.

I agree, we are not ever going to agree on this so I will drop it. Have a nice trip.

wriley4409
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 11:41 am

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby wriley4409 » Fri May 19, 2017 12:07 pm

I personally like Subaru Foresters. My family currently owns three - one each of 2012, 2015, and 2016 models. Subaru is currently offering 0% financing on the 2017 Foresters, and in most parts of the country you get two years of routine maintenance thrown in for free as well.

inbox788
Posts: 3673
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:24 pm

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby inbox788 » Fri May 19, 2017 4:01 pm

CyclingDuo wrote:Number one. Distracted drivers are the number one cause of automobile accidents in the US. Cell phone, text message, eating food.

Number two is caused by drunk driving.

Number three is speeding.

Number four is reckless driving (changing lanes too quickly/aggressive driving/speeding).

...
Number seven is night driving (lack of visibility).

Great list! Shows that not only do new cars not help prevent accidents, but can actually be the cause of more accidents. For example:
1) this one is easy, lots of new technology and buttons to press, android auto and apple car play let me mess around with my phone legally so I can be further distracted. I can order food with an app and get directions to the restaurant. I just need to figure out a better way to switch between voice calls, hangout voice, facetime or facetime audio and skype without taking my eyes off the road. :shock:
2) that Coolbox isn't perfect, but keeps my beer cooler and is easily reachable. :beer
http://owners.honda.com/vehicles/inform ... s/Cool-Box
3) Those new quiet interiors and smooth suspensions help me forget how fast I'm going. :wink:

7) Those bright xenon and led lights shining in my eyes really hurt my visibility. :x


inbox788
Posts: 3673
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:24 pm

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby inbox788 » Fri May 19, 2017 4:27 pm

jharkin wrote:Im not even trying to argue that these systems have no value. I agree they do. I just dont buy that they are necessarily MORE compelling than larger paradigm shifts in the past like radial tires, seatbelts, airbags, antilock brakes, etc. I find it interesting that for a group that obsesses of statistics and driving out the last 1/10 of 1 percent of cost so many just throw any analysis of data out the window and are willing to start dropping 10s of thousands of extra dollars at features that will reduce your chance of early death from 10 in a billion miles down to... 9 in a billion.

IMO, and I suspect there's some data out there to back me, is that the biggest bang for your buck safety equipment has been seatbelts and high mount brake light.
The requirement for the new brake light, primarily affecting 1986 models, was issued by the Reagan Administration despite its emphasis on deregulation, and it was generally accepted by auto makers.

Putting a third brake light on a car, in the line of vision of the driver in the car behind, is "low cost, and it has a lot of benefits," a federal auto safety official said.

Once all cars on the road have high-mounted brake lights, "there will be 900,000 fewer rear-end accidents" a year, 40,000 fewer injuries and a $434-million cut in property damage costs for consumers, according to estimates from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), a unit of the Department of Transportation.

The agency estimates the cost of the brake light at $4 to $7 a car.

http://articles.latimes.com/1985-09-03/ ... 1_air-bags

Also, some invisible changes have help, but aren't widely advertised or known, such as improved safety cages especially the side impact protection.

Low hanging fruit has been pretty much picked, and even middle hanging fruit are becoming sparse. Were facing diminishing returns on each additional safety device that works in fewer and fewer conditions and costs are spiraling upwards.

With the Takata fiasco, we'll have to re-evaluate the cost/benefit equation of airbags. I don't think it changes the conclusion, but the costs are certainly higher than previous estimates/assumptions. Putting a number on safety and lives is distasteful, but the alternative is to make decisions in the absence of data. Neither is a palatable option.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4494791/ ... ty-recalls

Should there be a national law to inspect and fix broken brake lights or require automatic collision avoidance systems? Which would be more effective in reducing rear end accidents? And what role does cost play?

BTW, here's a British comparison similar to Corolla video above comparing 20 year old car to today.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cars/feature ... nds-lives/

CyclingDuo
Posts: 381
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2017 9:07 am

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby CyclingDuo » Fri May 19, 2017 4:40 pm

carofe wrote:Airbags, ABS and Electronic Stability Control can save you a visit to the hospital when one of those drivers come headed towards your car. The other features are not critical but can help: collision prevention systems, getting out of track alerts, etc... Those can help you to not be the cause of the accident.


Our 12 year old Honda Element (2005) came with Airbags, ABS, Electronic Brake Distribution, and of course AWD. I think when looking at the OP's post asking for a reliable small SUV with hopes of getting 15 years out of it, they would be able to procure a 2017 or upcoming soon 2018 small SUV equipped with plenty of safety features to not make it obsolete in the next dozen - to 15 years.

Having recently test driven two on this list (Outback, and CRV turbo), I wouldn't hesitate to recommend the CRV. We also test drove the HR-V, Pilot, and Ridgeline.

Four vehicles interest me:
2018 Subaru Outback (open to either engine)
2018 Honda CR-V (turbo)
2017 Subaru Forester (non-turbo)
2017 Toyota RAV4


We would suggest that the OP not let any fear of purchasing a vehicle that would suddenly be obsolete deter the purchase of a quality automobile. Fear of sticking with or driving something for a long period time also should not prevent a consumer's choice. There are those of us who have driven a vehicle for a lengthy period of time. The average age of vehicles on the road in the US hit 11.6 years on January 1.2016.

http://www.autonews.com/article/2016112 ... 11.6-years

Kudos to the industry for building product that consumers can enjoy for a duration that tops former generations of vehicles' longevity.

inbox788
Posts: 3673
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:24 pm

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby inbox788 » Fri May 19, 2017 4:54 pm

Automakers, Government Agree Automatic Braking Will be Standard by 2022
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/busines ... 22-n540656

Note that as more cars have this technology, you'll find that risk transfers to the car following. Just like red light cameras prevented accidents in intersections, the side effect was an increase in rear end accidents from more sudden stops. Similarly, a following car may avoid hitting the car in front, but the car behind the following car better not be tailgating.

Of all the newer technologies, this is one I do agree with, even if it's a little costly because the savings from avoiding a collision will help offset some costs. But since the average age of cars is over 10 years, it will likely be past 2030 before half the cars on the road have this technology and we start to see the big benefits. Or you can get a CRV with one.

http://hondanews.com/releases/b7d80915- ... 8d95e17a56
Last edited by inbox788 on Fri May 19, 2017 5:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

testing321
Posts: 116
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 6:46 pm
Location: kansas city

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby testing321 » Fri May 19, 2017 5:02 pm

Jack FFR1846 wrote:Don't even get me started on Nissan CVT's.......
Anyone thinking about buying a Nissan should read one of the Nissan forums. Their CVT wasn't designed with the American buyer in mind (drive lots of miles and keep cars for many years). The best forums are at nicoclub.com

gym4866
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 5:29 pm

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby gym4866 » Sat May 20, 2017 7:14 pm

steadyeddy wrote:I would like to buy a new 2017 or 2018 small SUV, and keep it until the year 2030 and beyond. I recognize that some repairs will be required to keep a car running this long, but I'd like to minimize expensive repairs, and I certainly don't want to be regularly stranded on the side of the road as the vehicle ages.

Four vehicles interest me:
  • 2018 Subaru Outback (open to either engine)
  • 2018 Honda CR-V (turbo)
  • 2017 Subaru Forester (non-turbo)
  • 2017 Toyota RAV4
I like the Subarus best, but worry about oil consumption and head gasket failure. Are these issues fixed? I don't want to be topping off my oil once a month...or even checking it that often! I like the CR-V quite a bit, but worry about the new turbo engine. Do these fail often and/or consume oil? Are they expensive to replace if they fail? The RAV4 offers the least features for the most money, but I generally trust the uncomplicated drive train to last for 15 years. Is my trust misplaced?

I know all these vehicles are popular among Bogleheads, so basically I'm looking for reassurance that the average Subaru or Honda can make it for 15 years and my concerns are overblown. Either that or reassurance that it's worth paying more for a RAV4 that feels a bit outdated compared to the others if very long term reliability is at the top of my priority list. Those of you that are mechanically inclined, please help me out. I am getting lost in analysis paralysis as I spend hours reading reviews and anecdotal comments about each vehicle!

Maybe I can call myself a "hondahead"....but I have been driving Honda products since 1983.....that's 34 years without a complaint....never got rid of one because it had something wrong with it....as far as suv's my last 4 Honda's have been crv's...05/07/10/13...friend of mine just purchased a new top model rav 4 and I really like it.....as far as turbo's...I looked at the new crv's turbo....and my thinking in the past was I did'nt want anything turbo... But the people in the know at the dealerships say they are much better than they use to be because of the superior oil's that are produced today...one thing though...and I'm not 100% sure is if you own a turbo in will take premium gas.... As for me I try to.stay with something that takes 87 grade.......good luck shopping.

dbr
Posts: 21707
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 9:50 am

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby dbr » Sun May 21, 2017 8:43 am

gym4866 wrote:
Maybe I can call myself a "hondahead"....but I have been driving Honda products since 1983.....that's 34 years without a complaint....never got rid of one because it had something wrong with it.....


I and people in my family have been driving any variety of foreign and domestic cars for over fifty years and have never gotten rid of a car because something was wrong with it. That, however, would hardly be useful information to someone trying to pick one make and model over another on a nebulous criterion of fifteen year reliability.

User avatar
topper1296
Posts: 433
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:50 pm
Location: Nashville TN

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby topper1296 » Sun May 21, 2017 10:38 am

Not sure what part of the country you live in and what the weather is like there, however the Subaru AWD system blows the AWD systems Honda and Toyota has out of the water. Go to Youtube and search for Subaru AWD comparisons.

User avatar
Frugal Al
Posts: 1652
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 10:09 am

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby Frugal Al » Sun May 21, 2017 2:06 pm

topper1296 wrote:Not sure what part of the country you live in and what the weather is like there, however the Subaru AWD system blows the AWD systems Honda and Toyota has out of the water. Go to Youtube and search for Subaru AWD comparisons.

Not all Subarus have AWD systems that are much superior to the Hondas and Toyotas, but most Subarus do have a marginally better system for those that need AWD for hilly, snowy terrain. Most people can get buy with the lesser systems. Lucky for Subaru that they do have a good system because, for the most part, that is their niche--they have little else to offer. They are no longer all that reliable and their NVH, fit and finish, and quality of materials are decidedly second tier. I'm not a Subaru basher--my family has had a number of them over the years. Honda isn't always that reliable either, but they are still better than most. Today, the quality/reliablity leader seems to be Toyota. Now, if they would stop hitting their designs with an ugly stick I might consider one.

gym4866 wrote:I'm not 100% sure is if you own a turbo in will take premium gas.... As for me I try to.stay with something that takes 87 grade.......

The CR-V turbo calls for regular 87-octane--no need for premium.

User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
Posts: 37509
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 5:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Contact:

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby LadyGeek » Sun May 21, 2017 2:54 pm

The discussion is getting derailed on general vehicle safety and causes of accidents. Please stay on-topic, which is:
steadyeddy wrote:I would like to buy a new 2017 or 2018 small SUV, and keep it until the year 2030 and beyond. I recognize that some repairs will be required to keep a car running this long, but I'd like to minimize expensive repairs, and I certainly don't want to be regularly stranded on the side of the road as the vehicle ages.

Four vehicles interest me:
  • 2018 Subaru Outback (open to either engine)
  • 2018 Honda CR-V (turbo)
  • 2017 Subaru Forester (non-turbo)
  • 2017 Toyota RAV4
I like the Subarus best, but worry about oil consumption and head gasket failure. Are these issues fixed? I don't want to be topping off my oil once a month...or even checking it that often! I like the CR-V quite a bit, but worry about the new turbo engine. Do these fail often and/or consume oil? Are they expensive to replace if they fail? The RAV4 offers the least features for the most money, but I generally trust the uncomplicated drive train to last for 15 years. Is my trust misplaced?

I know all these vehicles are popular among Bogleheads, so basically I'm looking for reassurance that the average Subaru or Honda can make it for 15 years and my concerns are overblown. Either that or reassurance that it's worth paying more for a RAV4 that feels a bit outdated compared to the others if very long term reliability is at the top of my priority list. Those of you that are mechanically inclined, please help me out. I am getting lost in analysis paralysis as I spend hours reading reviews and anecdotal comments about each vehicle!
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.

User avatar
fandango
Posts: 451
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2010 6:44 pm
Location: Greater Atlanta area

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby fandango » Sun May 21, 2017 3:19 pm

I have a Honda CRV, and it is keeper. My mechanics tell me the only issues are electronic - meaning all the stuff you don't use in the driver's compartment.

I was considering a second CRV but a turbo is standard on the top end models. A non- turbo engine is available on the LX and EX.
Most auto makers are experimenting with turbos (to squeeze out more gas mileage but maintain some get up and go). I don't want to be part of the experiment. Wait a couple of years if you want a Honda CRV.

jay22
Posts: 669
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 8:56 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby jay22 » Mon May 22, 2017 12:21 pm

Got the 2017 CRV in Feb - fantastic car, no issues at all. Test drove the RAV4 as well, but CRV was way better, both in terms of interiors and handling.

nwrolla
Posts: 137
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 4:52 pm

Re: Which Small SUV for 15 Year Reliability?

Postby nwrolla » Mon May 22, 2017 11:35 pm

Long time Subaru owner here, my advice would be pick the one you enjoy driving most and take good care of it. Most cars today are engineered to last a long time. Yes there are some quirks for different brands but if you are aware of it you can adequately plan for the maintenance.

I currently have a 2015 outback and thoroughly enjoy it. No issues with oil burning. The local shop cited it was more common in manual transmissions than automatics. But who knows.

I also have an 08 Impreza wagon that will get a head gasket replacement at 100k when the timing belt and water pump is repaired regardless if it is burning coolant or not. I would rather do the work and not have needed it than have the alternate scenario. Especially given the fact it doesn't cost much more to have the gaskets replaced.....


Return to “Personal Consumer Issues”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: highdesert, Jaction, jharkin, lemme think, MoonOrb, panhead, Pretzel lover, randomguy and 45 guests