I’ve always been a big fan of mini-SUVs. They give a great view out, are easy and fun to drive, and are relatively economical, especially when compared to their much bigger and much more truck-like brethren. Compared to cars, they are much more versatile when it comes to both cargo-carrying capabilities and rough road driving.
Pricewise (at least before the dreaded RR-4-2003 revised vehicle taxation kicks in), they give great value for money — specifically the two sub-P1 million sport-cutes currently available, the Honda CR-V and the Toyota RAV 4 SV. So which one is the best? Let’s have a look.
Style-wise, our three protagonists, the aforementioned CR-V, RAV 4 and Ford’s Escape, take on three different schools of thought. The RAV 4 is easily the sportiest of the bunch. It’s almost like a reduced-scale BMW X5 with its deeply sculpted side panels and sharp, rakish lines. The CR-V is more conservative, offering thoughtful design cues like the tall taillight clusters and flush roof rails and side windows. Compared to these two, the Ford Escape borders on the boring, what with its old-style non-clear lens headlamp treatment, ho-hum honeycomb grille and uninspired taillamps. Overall, the design of the Escape and the CR-V should appeal to more conservative buyers while the RAV 4’s aesthetics is targeted at the younger and sportier set.
Sizewise the CR-V outstretches the Escape and the RAV 4 by 135 and a whopping 370 millimeters, respectively. That’s almost 15 inches longer than the RAV 4! The Escape is widest, however, by 45mm over the CR-V and 80mm over the RAV 4. The Honda again gains the upper hand in height, by a tiny 10mm over the Ford and a sizable 55 mm over the Toyota. In terms of wheelbase (which greatly affect legroom and riding comfort), the Honda is an even match with the Ford at 2,620 mm each, with the Toyota a full 130 millimeters in arrears.
Two of these three car-based mini-SUVs go to battle bristling with high-tech variable valve timing motors under their hoods. The CR-V boasts Honda’s i-VTEC 2.0-liter twin cam 16-valve engine while the RAV 4 counters this with Toyota’s equally advanced DOHC 16-valve VVTi powerplant displacing 1.8 (M/T) or 2.0 (A/T) liters. The Ford comes with a 2.0-liter twin cam 16-valve but without variable valve timing.
The Honda motor dishes out an energetic 150 horsepower at a relatively high 6500 rpm while the Toyota pumps out a slightly lower 148 (2.0)/145 (1.8) horsepower at a lower 6000 rpm. The Ford trails the two with its 130 hp at an even more accessible 5500 rpm.
Torquewise, the Honda twists out the rough equivalent of 190 Newton-meters at 4000 rpm while the Toyota delivers 192 N-m at 4000 rpm for its 2.0-liter engine and a slightly lower 188 N-m at a slightly higher 4200 rpm for its 1.8-liter motor. The Ford again trails the Honda and Toyota’s 2.0-liter engines with its 188 N-m at a higher 4500 rpm.
On the road (and even while idling), the Honda and Toyota engines underscore their superiority with uncanny silence and freedom from vibration, even at high revs. The Escape’s engine, on the other hand, is course-sounding at idling and at low engine speeds but smoothens out at mid to high rpm. In city and highway driving, you never get the feeling that you could use more power from any of these engines. All three mini-trucks are available with manual and automatic transmissions, although you get the 1.8-liter downgrade engine with the RAV 4 if you want a stickshift.
In the underchassis department, all three use independent strut suspensions and coil springs with stabilizer bars in front. At the rear, the Honda and Toyota employ independent double wishbones and coil springs while the Ford uses independent double lateral links, coil springs and trailing arms.
Ride quality in the automatic transmission-equipped variants of the CR-V and Escape are excellent, better even than most compact cars. For some reason, however, a manual transmission-equipped CR-V rode more harshly than its automatic-equipped twin. The RAV 4, with its much shorter wheelbase, exhibited some hop at cruising speeds, although not to the point of discomfort. The Toyota’s short wheelbase and large (for its size) 215/70R16 tires, however, combined to deliver the most responsive handling among the three, easily fulfilling the "sport" in "sport-utility vehicle". It is also the only one with full-time 4WD (2.0 A/T variant only), with the Escape providing part-time 4WD (there is also an entry-level 4x2 Escape model) and the CR-V coming in front-wheel-drive guise only.
In the braking department all, but the 2.0-liter A/T RAV 4 which has four-wheel disc brakes, use front disc brakes and rear drum brakes. All three (except for the entry-level variants of the Escape and RAV 4) offer ABS with Electronic Brakeforce Distribution (EBD).
Safety First
In the safety features ledger, all three (with the exception of the 4x2 Escape which omit airbags) boast dual airbags, three-point seatbelts for front and rear passengers, side door beams, crumple zones, and third brake lights.
| Comfort & Convenience Features |
Inside, the CR-V’s third row bench may be laughed at by some, but when it comes to transporting five adults and two kids, there is simply no alternative. For maximum cargo loading, just take off the third row. Simple. Space for five adults is roughly equal in both the Honda and the Ford, with the Toyota better suited for four. The RAV 4’s cargo area is also noticeably smaller than the other two.
Each vehicle also has its own nifty interior design touches: the flat-folding rear seats and the seatback trays with integrated cupholders of the Escape; the tie-down hooks, cargo nets, inner roof rail, multi-configuration seats and the cool picnic table of the CR-V; and the collapsible rear seats, package tray and tonneau cover of the RAV 4. All three also have convenient 12V powerpoints front and rear for laptops, coolers, etc.
In the audio entertainment department, all feature good-sounding stereo systems with in-dash CD players, with the CR-V and RAV 4 A/T using a 2-DIN head unit and the RAV 4 M/T opting for a 1-DIN equivalent. The Escape trumps the two with its 6-disc in-dash CD changer. No VCD players or LCD monitors are currently offered in any of the three.
With the looming excise tax ruling seen to wreak havoc with the prices of new commercial vehicles, it’s best to focus on their current pricing, of which the CR-V is easily king when it comes to bang for the buck. The RAV 4 M/T, with its P990,000 sticker price, is a close second, hampered only by its smallish size and its stickshift-only drivetrain. The Escape and the RAV 4 4x4 are clearly saddled by their P1.3 million-plus retail prices, although the revised taxation should even out the playing field considerably.