I am currently in the market for a compact SUV. I have shopped the Toyota RAV4 and the Honda CR-V. I was leaning toward buying the Honda CR-V. However, after reading owner reviews, the one complaint that kept surfacing was the lack of horsepower which is rated at 166 hp. That was pushing me toward the Toyota RAV 4 with the V6 rated @ 269 hp. However, I hate that spare tire on the back!
I really love the looks of the Rogue. My concern is the Rogue's 2.5l 170 hp engine. If 166 seems to be lacking in the CRV. What would leave me to belive that 4 more ponies in the Rogue's engine would be sufficient?
Am I missing something here? Anyone else have the same concern?__________________________
mother of the bride dress
discount wedding dress
mother of the groom dress
Horsepower Concerns
-
SpenceCheney
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 11:51 pm
- Car: My car is BMW
Horsepower Concerns
Last edited by SpenceCheney on Thu Jan 06, 2011 6:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
casperfun
- Posts: 1447
- Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 4:59 am
- Car: 2009 Nissan Rogue SL AWD - Indigo Blue
- Location: Mid-Atlantic States
Re: Horsepower Concerns
No. 
That's one reason I chose the Rogue because of no tire on the back. But Actually, the Rav 4wd with the sport appearance package has no tire on the back too.
That's one reason I chose the Rogue because of no tire on the back. But Actually, the Rav 4wd with the sport appearance package has no tire on the back too.
-
crayb
- Posts: 135
- Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2009 7:36 pm
- Car: 09 Rogue SL Fwd (Prem,Lther,Snrf), 11 Hyundai Sonata SE, 04 Lexus RX330, 92 Mazda Miata C 5spd
- Location: Central MS, USA
Re: Horsepower Concerns
The Rogue has plenty of power for me. I'm actually amazed at how quick it is. I also LOVE, LOVE the CVT. Weird at first but I now find myself counting the shifts in my other non-CVT vehicles and noticing how clunky the transmissions are in them.
However if you are towing a boat or a hauling 4 other people with luggage you may not feel it's powerful enough for your needs. Test drive one for more than 5-10 minutes, really test drive it like you would with real-time use, and you'll be able to tell if it will be sufficient.
Ray
However if you are towing a boat or a hauling 4 other people with luggage you may not feel it's powerful enough for your needs. Test drive one for more than 5-10 minutes, really test drive it like you would with real-time use, and you'll be able to tell if it will be sufficient.
Ray
-
philipa_240sx
- Posts: 3808
- Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:30 am
- Location: Canada
Re: Horsepower Concerns
Agreed, test drive one. I find mine has plenty of power. The CVT combined with the low end grunt of the QR25DE motor is a great combination is city driving. It accelerates very well in the 10-40mph range. Highway passing power is decent.
The CVT is very deceptive BTW. Since there are no shift points, you don't get the same sensation as a conventional transmission. But a quick glance at the speedo tells you you are going plenty fast.
But the Rogue is no comparison to the rocket RAV-4 V6... Low 7 second 0-60 is pretty fast compared to the mid 8's the Rogue is capable of.
The CVT is very deceptive BTW. Since there are no shift points, you don't get the same sensation as a conventional transmission. But a quick glance at the speedo tells you you are going plenty fast.
But the Rogue is no comparison to the rocket RAV-4 V6... Low 7 second 0-60 is pretty fast compared to the mid 8's the Rogue is capable of.
-
Nick 568
- Posts: 304
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:59 am
- Car: 2008 Nissan Rogue
- Location: Anchorage, Alaska
Re: Horsepower Concerns
Another thing about the CR-V. It's not just 4 HP less as to why it feels so slow. Those Honda I4's rev to high hell, but suck at making torque. The QR25DE in the Rogue has a muuuch more torquier feel to it.
Also, for 2010, the CR-V has been upgraded to 180 HP and 161 lb-ft of torque @ 4400 rpm. (as opposed to 166 and 161 @ 4200 rpm for 2009 and below) Same torque, but the HP bump would make a noticeable difference I would imagine.
(Rogue is 170 HP and 175 lb-ft of torque @ 4400 rpm...doesn't sound like a whole lot, but when I test drove a 2008 CR-V and a 2008 Rogue, the Rogue felt far more powerful)
Also, for 2010, the CR-V has been upgraded to 180 HP and 161 lb-ft of torque @ 4400 rpm. (as opposed to 166 and 161 @ 4200 rpm for 2009 and below) Same torque, but the HP bump would make a noticeable difference I would imagine.
(Rogue is 170 HP and 175 lb-ft of torque @ 4400 rpm...doesn't sound like a whole lot, but when I test drove a 2008 CR-V and a 2008 Rogue, the Rogue felt far more powerful)
-
takeshi
- Posts: 313
- Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 9:55 am
- Car: 2008 Nissan Rogue SL AWD
- Location: Houston, TX
Re: Horsepower Concerns
2 things:SpenceCheney wrote:Am I missing something here?
Test driving and torque.
Don't rely on spec sheet racing.
Re: Horsepower Concerns
It is personal preference I think. I own both the Rav4 and the rogue. The rav4 is by far faster and quieter and bigger. But i like my 2011 rogue more.....I got a lot more for the money (it is cheaper) i like the looks inside and out more...and it is get on gas.
I researched the crv, and it is more expensive than the rogue, and it just doesnt look good enough outside for me to see myself in it... no matter how fast or slow it is.
They are all good car...would need to know a lil more about your situation and what you are looking for before suggesting anything.
I researched the crv, and it is more expensive than the rogue, and it just doesnt look good enough outside for me to see myself in it... no matter how fast or slow it is.
They are all good car...would need to know a lil more about your situation and what you are looking for before suggesting anything.