2013 Compact Crossover Alternatives Comparison TestThe compact crossover market is growing at an almost alarming rate. What was once a niche product is now a must-have model in every lineup. Trendy isn’t even the right word here because we feel like it’s going to be more than just a passing fad, these functional well-proportioned vehicles are here to stay.
With a bevy of compact crossovers to choose from, we decided to look at the “Other Guys;” the ones you might not consider because of quirky looks or a possibly-too-small trunk. We wanted to see how these AWD compact crossover outsiders stacked up against one another on snowy country roads on a cold, February day. Some might see the results as predictable once they know the lineup, but our group were surprised by a few of the players and their final placement. From cornering on slick, snow-covered roads to fitting a stroller in the back and an unscientific 0-25m AWD acceleration test on a questionably icy surface, our compact crossover alternatives did their very best to impress, no matter what we threw their way. And with the marked absence of the Jeep Compass, we saw one vehicle rise to the top of the pack almost immediately, while the others scrambled to hold ground for second and third, while the remainder lagged behind without a chance. Of course, all six vehicles on our comparison drive were equipped with winter tires (six different brands/types), and each had available AWD. All sported automatic transmissions and half featured turbocharged powerplants. The same baby seat and stroller were mounted in each vehicle for consistency.
6 – 2013 Mitsubishi RVR (71.57%) On its own, the Mits RVR isn’t a bad vehicle. It has all the makings of a practical, well-designed compact crossover ideal for our Canadian winters. However, once it lined up next to the competition, its shortcomings were glaringly obvious, and something none of us could ignore despite our positive preconceived notions before the comparo drive began.
Let’s start with the good: From the outside the 2013 Mitsubishi RVR has a manly, go-anywhere look that appealed to both the male and female sides of our comparo panel. While perhaps not as futuristic-looking as a few of the vehicles on our alternative compact crossover drive, the Mitsubishi RVR still manages to remain relevant and modern with clean lines and subtle chrome accents. Inside, the 2013 Mitsubishi RVR continued to impress our panel with its simplistic, easy-to-use centre stack, as well as comfortable leather seats. The backseat offers plenty of room (with an easy install of a baby seat) but the upright design of the seats themselves is less than comfy. And as for trunk space (569 litres available in the trunk with the rear seats up), the RVR boasts one of the largest making it one of the most practical in terms of storage and cargo. And that’s where the good ends. The 2013 Mitsubishi RVR is equipped with a 2.0L I-4 MIVEC engine good for 148 hp and 145 lb-ft of torque, and despite the Sportronic CVT with paddle shifters, the transmission was the source of its undoing. Across the board, we all felt that the transmission was slow, generally uncooperative and created a far too loud powertrain. Even when “shifting” for ourselves the transmission felt outwardly lazy. It’s comparison drives like these that really show a car’s true nature, and when the RVR was measured up against the likes of the Nissan and Subaru’s CVTs, it was clear to all of us that Mitsubishi needs to go back the drawing board on this one. Another area of complaint amongst our panel was the need to cycle through “settings” to attain an AWD lock. While the ability to change the drivetrain from 2WD to AWD is a measure to save on fuel and keep the RVR more efficient, it’s also rather obnoxious. With the AWD on full lock, the 2013 Mitsubishi RVR managed our highly unscientific 0-25m acceleration test in the 3-4 second range (as most did). It was not the best, which may have something to do with the slow-to-react transmission. And on the subject of fuel efficiency, over our drive day the Mits averaged 12.2L/100km. Not an outstanding number, but not the worst either. Overall, the Mitsubishi RVR is a capable AWD vehicle with a ride height befitting any good off-roader (215 mm) and enough cargo space to haul family and gear, but it just didn’t live up to the bar set by others on the comparo.
Here’s another vehicle that, on its own isn’t all that bad. However, against its very strong opposition , the Chevy Trax fell much too short on things like material quality, acceleration, handling, and interior space. With such fierce competition, we assumed the Trax would bring more to the table, being all new and such. We all know better than to assume now.
When a vehicle’s exterior look is described as “not offensive but not exciting,” it’s perhaps time to rethink the design as a whole. And that individual on our panel wasn’t the only one to feel that way about the 2013 Chevrolet Trax. Most felt the exterior was “unique” and possibly the Chevy’s winning point. Muscular rear wheel arches and a snubby front end give the Trax a playful, bulldog look that some found endearing. And then it all went downhill inside. It was pretty much unanimous across the comparo panel that the 2013 Chevrolet Trax has a less than stellar interior that feels and looks cheap. From materials, the questionable fit and finish to the layout, we couldn’t get past the dated feel of it all. A few of our drivers commented on a ‘80s-‘90s era look, and not in a good way. From the alarm-clock speed-o (something also found on the Sonic and Spark) to the lack of heated seats (found in every other comparo vehicle), the Chevy Trax’ only saving grace in terms of interior design was the integration of MyLink. Equipped with the smallest engine, a 1.4L ECOTEC I-4 VVT, the fact that it also boasts a turbo meant little for its horsepower and torque (138/148), of which the first was the lowest of the bunch. Acceleration was felt to be slow and laboured, and while the shifts were “quick” via the Chevy’s Hydra-Matic 6-speed automatic transmission (with available manual mode that requires the use of a little button on the shift lever), most felt the vehicle still felt sluggish under hard acceleration, with a mushy feel to the throttle. And under more severe handling situations -- like twisty, two-lane country roads covered with patches of snow -- the 2013 Chevrolet Trax really showed its true colours, of which none were very pretty. Confidence behind the wheel dwindled as body roll was prevalent. Despite boasting the best mileage numbers of the day (9.7L/100km) as well as one of the larger cargo areas (530 litres) and a spacious back seat that offered a good amount of space for a baby seat and rear passengers, the 2013 Chevrolet Trax did not impress as much as we had hoped.
Here’s one of the shockers from our compact crossover alternatives comparo drive. When we first lined up the vehicles we all assumed (there’s that word again) that the SX4 would dwindle to the end of the pack, falling behind because of its size, outdated looks and simple interior. Not to mention its nameplate.
However, the 2013 Suzuki SX4 rose above those we thought would do better, perhaps due to the other’s shortcomings because in actual fact the SX4 had one of the worst fuel rating (12.6L/100km), the smallest cargo space (203 litres) and was also one of the least powerful (150 hp and 140 lb-ft of torque from the 2.0L 4-cylinder mill), as well as the slowest in our 0-25m dash thanks to an oversensitive stability control system. Other complaints for the SX4 included too-stiff seats and a dash-mounted nav screen that was impossible to see in the bright winter sunlight. Yet, somehow, this little alternative compact crossover made it to the middle of the pack. With fantastic visibility -- best of the bunch according to our panel -- and a competent AWD system, the 2013 Suzuki SX4’s sluggish CVT was forgiven, especially with the available steering-wheel mounted paddle shifters. The SX4’s ground clearance (at 175 mm) is also one of the lowest in the bunch. So, how did it manage to wiggle its way up in ranks? Perhaps it had something to do with its quirky styling and roomy interior -- headroom up front is quite astonishing and makes for a comfortable ride, despite seats that seem to be pushing you forward through the windscreen. Perhaps it has to do with its simple, unassuming nature which made us fall for it, like a lost and lonely dog. Whatever it was, the 2013 Suzuki SX4 made an impact on a few of our drivers, one of whom even said he’d have one as a second vehicle at home.
In third place, we have the fun-to-drive, smile-inducing MINI. Loveable for its looks and heritage, the Countryman is MINI’s answer to all the naysayers who felt MINIs couldn’t be practical, family vehicles. Equipped with all-wheel drive, a three-person backseat and four doors, this Cooper is all about being efficient for everyday life.
Let’s start with the bad (since there is much more good when it comes to the MINI). Right away, it’s the Countryman’s price that landed it in third place. As the most expensive of the bunch, it’s hard to justify the premium when you can get the same amenities and, essentially, performance in a vehicle that will cost you about $58k less. However, MINI owners (and those who wish to become MINI owners) will defend their purchase price till the EVs come home as being totally worth it -- and with good reason. Outfitted with a 1.6L twin-scroll turbocharged engine good for 181 horsepower and 177 lb-ft of torque, the MINI Cooper S Countryman ALL4 is one of the peppiest in the lineup. The MINI was one of the fastest off the line in our 0-25mm test, and in non-winter conditions MINI says it will hit 100km from standstill in 7.8 seconds (with the 6-speed auto, as tested). All testers agreed that the MINI offered a most enjoyable time behind the wheel with good engine response, excellent acceleration and an exhaust note that had all drivers grinning. The ALL4’s permanent 50/50 all-wheel drive is also quite impressive, boasting the ability to push as much as 100% of the power to the rear wheels in extreme conditions. Of course, the AWD components on the MINI also meant that most of the drivers felt the MINI’s weight -- this isn’t a lightweight hatch Cooper, after all. Exterior and interior looks of the 2013 MINI Cooper S Countryman ALL4 can be polarizing, and have been since it was first introduced in 2010. Some find it too boxy and square to be called a MINI, while others feel it follows the company’s styling cues perfectly. Inside, the larger-than-life, middle-mounted speedometer is another point of design contention and had some intrigued, while others were annoyed and didn’t see the point. All confirmed the seats in the MINI Countryman were sporty, yet comfortable. Room in the back seat is limited, but at least there is the option to try and squeeze a third human being in there (though we recommend they be of the small variety). And with 460 litres of cargo space, the MINI was far from the most spacious, but was not the worst and the 4moms Origami stroller fit quite nicely, as did the baby seat.
A well-deserved second place spot is reserved for the quirky 2013 Nissan JUKE SL AWD. In all honesty, the only reason this vehicle didn’t catch first place in this compact crossover alternatives comparo test is because of its polarizing exterior and interior designs, along with a few interior space issues.
To look at the 2013 Nissan JUKE is to look at a company that’s not afraid to think outside the box and offer something off the beaten path (clichés are the best way to say something nice, right?). Our comparo drivers used terms like “funky,” “futuristic,” “peculiar,” and “a face only Picasso could love” to describe the JUKE’s exterior styling cues. But, no one said they outright hated it. Same goes for the interior bits and pieces. With coloured inserts (red, no less, to match the exterior) throughout the cabin in hard plastic, it was easy to see why the design was love-it-or-hate-it in nature. All agreed that despite the in-your-face colour, the middle stack was well laid out and easy to use. The steering wheel was comfortable, and the gauge cluster was both sporty and well arranged. Fit and finish in the 2013 Nissan JUKE SL feels above and beyond its price range in some respects, and was noted as such by a few drivers. From the coloured stitching on the leather seats, to the feel of the knobs, all were duly impressed with the JUKE from the inside. Driving the Nissan JUKE blissfully means you don’t have to look at its front fascia, so all is forgiven. Especially when you take into consideration the performance its 1.6L DIG turbocharged engine puts forth. With 188 horsepower (most powerful of the lot) and 177 lb-ft of torque all managed by Nissan’s CVT transmission, the JUKE impressed drivers on the winding country roads we traversed for our drive. Unlike some CVTs, the transmission isn’t overtly noisy, and the “shifts” are quick via the gear lever, when desired. The Nissan JUKE also managed to score one of the best fuel ratings (second to the Trax) at 11.9L/100km, despite all comparo drivers feeling the need to push the little crossover a little harder because it was such a blast to drive. Where the 2013 Nissan JUKE SL fell flat was in interior space and access. With a ground clearance rating in the 170 mm range it’s not the lowest to the ground (the MINI holds that spot at 122 mm), however, it felt the smallest and most compact due to small, angled door openings to the rear seats. The baby seat barely fit, and only did once the rear head rest had been removed, and even then the edge of the seat was wedged quite tightly against the rear pillar; and the 4moms Origami stroller didn’t fit in the trunk at all (which offers 297 L of space, surprisingly). Also, due to the design of the vehicle, all drivers noted poor visibility out the rear when compared to the rest of the pack.
At the top of the pack sits the Tangerine Orange 2013 Subaru XV Crosstrek, as it should. When it comes to compact crossovers, there are certain things one comes to expect: interior space, fuel efficiency and (in the case of AWD models) driveability no matter what the road conditions or weather. And in all areas, the Subaru XV Crosstrek excels.
Some may see the 2013 Subaru XV Crosstrek as an oversized Impreza, and essentially it is. Despite that, all testers felt the Subaru’s look was both modern and clean. With just the right amount of “rough” in its black-trimmed wheel wells and black bumper inserts, the Crosstrek looks the part of weekend country warrior. “Rugged good looks” was a sentence used often throughout the day when describing the Crosstrek’s exterior design. With the highest ground clearance of the lot (220 mm) and the most cargo space (632 litres), the Subie is meant to tackle urban and rural life -- no matter what. What’s most impressive about the 2013 Subaru XV Crosstrek was how well it scored for interior looks/feel/design when it was one of the least tricked out of the bunch. With no navigation system and cloth seats, it still rose to the top because of its ease of use and practicality. Ingress and egress is easy as the doors open wide in both the front and back. While the photo in the gallery shows the baby seat protruding off the rear seat as if it were too short, it wasn’t pushed back far enough and actually fit very well; as did the stroller in the trunk (with plenty of room left over for groceries, bags, etc.) and even the cargo privacy cover could be extended over everything. As for the drive, the 2013 Subaru XV Crosstrek continued to impressive with its 2.0L horizontally opposed 4-cylinder BOXER engine. With 148 horsepower and 145 lb-ft of torque, we weren’t impressed with its brute strength, but more its overall finesse. And despite a CVT, most were impressed with the power delivery (though a few felt it was a bit sluggish and noisy). More than a few of the comparo drivers complained of a loose, disconnected feel to the steering; but all agreed that visibility and manoeuvrability in the Crosstrek were great. Of course, Subaru’s AWD is its shining achievement, and it deserves every accolade it gets for the symmetrical, all-time system that performs so well, all the time. Coupled to the Lineatronic CVT is an electronically controlled multi-plate transfer clutch that didn’t disappoint, no matter what terrain we put it on.
As we drove around in our compact crossover alternatives all day, it was clear we had an eclectic bunch of vehicles designed for discerning tastes and those looking for something a little “different” than the average crossover. But were they worth the extra dollars and foibles?
Is the reason the 2013 Subaru XC Crosstrek rose to the top of the pack because it was the most “normal” of the bunch? The least polarizing and the most -- dare we say? -- generic of the lot? Perhaps. Then again, perhaps it’s just that it does everything well. It doesn’t excel in one department (like the MINI on driveability, or the JUKE in quirky styling) or fail miserably in another (like the RVR’s transmission), it manages to take everything and do it in a way that’s satisfying to all. Not underdone and not overdone; and that seems to answer a happy medium question we all want the answer to. We know the compact crossover market will continue to flourish as it’s been doing over the past few years. It’s a popular segment full of possibilities and we’re all excited to see what the future holds for manufacturers across the globe, and by association, us as consumers. Till next comparo…
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||