Consumer Reports Rates Midsized Suvs

[gtfrench]

I just received the latest Consumer Reports (Nov issue) and they have updated the ratings for midsized SUVs. The vehicles tested include the Highlander Hybrid and the RX400h plus the new MB ML350, Subaru B9 Tribeca, Nissan Pathfinder, Land Rover LR3, Jeep Grand Cherokee and the Hummer H3. Their top seven (out of 29) recommended vehicles and overall ratings are now:

1. Highlander Hybrid, Excellent (22 mpg)

2. RX 400h, Excellent (23 mpg)

3. RX 330, Very Good (18 mpg)

4. Honda Pilot EX-L, Very Good (19 mpg)

5. BMW X5 3.0i, Very Good (17 mpg)

6. Highlander, Very Good (19 mpg)

7. Nissan Murano SL, Very Good (19 mpg)

Out of 29 vehicles in this category, the MB ML350 (16 mpg) came out in 12th position, Tribeca (16 mpg) in 19th, Pathfinder (15 mpg) in 20th, LR3 (13 mpg!) in 21st, Cherokee (14 mpg) in 25th and H3 (14 mpg) in dead last 29th.

The article describes a a few minor differences between the Highlanderh and 400h and praises their acceleration, transmission, fuel economy, low emissions, ride, fit and finish, access and quietness. CR also expects some buyers to be disappointed in the mileage if their interest in hybrids is only to save money. Also, the article states "According to our 2005 subscriber survey, the 400h's reliability has been excellent in the short time it's been in owners hands." Overall, a very favorable write-up. My experiences have been very similar to their description except for two areas, mileage and headlights. For some reason, CR really doesn't like the Highlander and RX400h's headlight performance. I believe the headlights work great. I also have experienced better gas mileage than 23 mpg (currently averaging 26.6 mpg with 7,000 miles). My mix of city and highway may be different than CR's 50/50 split. However, the CR ratings are probably good for an apples to apples comparison to the competitive vehicles.

[rexmiami]

After 7500 miles I am averaging 27.06 calculated mpg on 87 octane fuel. I ran a few tanks of premium which gave me an extra 1-2 mpg. Other than numerous short trips or very hard driving, I can't figure out why some 400h drivers are getting such low mpg. But even with their lower numbers the 400h still gets far better mileage than it's competators.

The headlights seem fine to me so I do not understand what caused the low rating in htis area.

Once againg Consumer Reports has reported that Toyota and the Lexus brand are the highest rated automobiles in their respective areas.

[RX400h]

I received this issue as well. The interesting thing is that the Highlander produced lower fuel mileage numbers than the RX400h, yet the RX400h is heavier by 100 lbs. They did mention that the RX was quieter and better riding. Its disadvantage is that it doesn't handle quite as well. The other thing I noticed is that the RX offers heated seats, the Highlander, nada.

As expected, both vehicles trounced the Mercedes and BMW competition. No competitor came close to the gas milage figures of the two hybrids. As was mentioned, many are extreme gas guzzlers.

BTW, I don't baby the RX and yet get a consistent 25 MPG.

[JasonATL]

Thanks for posting the CR rankings. I stopped getting CR a long time ago; but, I realize how influential it can be to others. So, it is good to know that Toyota/Lexus and especially the hybrids ranked well.

I don't get the 23 MPG. I never have gotten below 24 over a 100+ miles or so range. In my last 1,000 miles (I currently have 4,000 total miles), I have averaged 28.5 MPG. This is, notably, without the AC. With AC, I was getting 26.5, 50/50 city/hwy. All of this with premium fuel. Having just written that down, I now can understand the 23. Turn on the AC, drive it like you would any other car (without coasting or using the cruise control), and use regular 87 octane fuel, and I see how you would get down to 23 MPG. As pointed out above, the apples-to-apples still bests the 330 by more than 25% in fuel economy and more for the other competitors, without considering it has better power.

[gtfrench]

A while back I compared the features of the RX400h and HighlanderH. This is what I came up with.

The Highlander should be an excellent choice for people who don't care as much about the Lexus luxury image, comfort, convenience and safety. Certainly the styling and audio are superior in the RX 400h and these are some of the other features I wanted.

1 yr. better warranty

AWD vs. 4WD

New advanced stability control (VDIM)

18" vs. 17" wheels, better tires

Better hitch capabilities

Power liftgate ( this is very convenient)

Superior power seat height adjustments, memory, and telescopic steering (good for shorter drivers)

Free loaner cars/pickup delivery to my house

One touch power windows

Auto -dimming mirrors

Reverse tilt mirrors and rear view camera

Superior instrumentation and layout (personal preference)

Driver knee airbag

Xenon adaptive headlamps with washers

Rain sensing wipers (this is even better than I imagined)

Video system

Superior Nav system upgrade with voice recognition

Somewhat more cargo capacity and versatility

Bluetooth capability for hands free phone (this was a must for me)

The Highlander does have an option for a third row if that is important to anyone. It will likely be a big seller and very reliable.

On the power comment, it's also interesting to note that of the 29 midsized SUVs on the CR list, only one of them performs better 0 to 60 mph - the Cadillac SRX (16 mpg) @ 6.4 sec. However, they are very close on the 45 to 65 mph test - SRX @ 4.3 sec. and RX400h @ 4.6 sec. Unfortunately, the Cadillac has had poor reliability.

[RX400h]

That's a great comparison list, QT! I noticed that the ground clearance listed for the Highlander is quite a bit more than that of the RX400h. The overall height of each is similar, so I'm not sure why there is a significant difference.

[Mike21LA]

Does anyone have an idea on why the headlights for the 400H were rated "poor" with the black filled-in circle? They never mentioned why in the article.

Thanks!

Mike

[gtfrench]

Does anyone have an idea on why the headlights for the 400H were rated "poor" with the black filled-in circle?  They never mentioned why in the article.

Thanks!

Mike

←

I sent a question to CR and got this quick response from one of their test engineers ...

"The RX400h headlights have very good intensity and good width (which may be why you like yours), but their low-beam distance is quite short and the light cut-off is abrupt. The scoring for headlights strongly favors distance as that's directly linked to you seeing an obstacle early enough to brake in time."

Tom Mutchler, CR Auto Test Engineer

[Mike21LA]

Does anyone have an idea on why the headlights for the 400H were rated "poor" with the black filled-in circle?  They never mentioned why in the article.

Thanks!

Mike

←

I sent a question to CR and got this quick response from one of their test engineers ...

"The RX400h headlights have very good intensity and good width (which may be why you like yours), but their low-beam distance is quite short and the light cut-off is abrupt. The scoring for headlights strongly favors distance as that's directly linked to you seeing an obstacle early enough to brake in time."

Tom Mutchler, CR Auto Test Engineer

←

Thank you very much for the feedback. This confirms for me something I had originally thought. I brought this issue up to the Lexus dealership, complaining that when driving at night (or more noticeably on an upward slope), the headlights seem a bit low and don't appear to illuminate far enough ahead. They inspected the headlights and said their positioning was correct and that the HIDs are lower on the left side as to not blind oncoming traffic. I wonder if the headlights could be adjusted up a little anyways to fix this issue.

Thanks for your response,

Mike

[gtfrench]

This might explain a lot about the mileage results in CR's test (16 City/29 Hwy). I asked CR to send me the test parameters and the same engineer responded below. I'm now wondering if the CR City test is really valid for the hybrid. It doesn't appear to be long enough to allow for the normal cycles that the battery goes through in normal city driving conditions. I would think a longer test would give more accurate results.

CR Fuel Economy Tests

"Gerald, there are more details on our fuel economy tests here. As an aside, although we did not instrument it, it does appear that fuel economy for these hybrids (at least the "performance" hybrids like the Highlander and RX400h) doesn't suffer as much from a heavy foot - rather than dumping gas into the engine when you floor it, some of that power comes from the battery."

Tom Mutchler, CR Auto Test Engineer

Details of the tests

The vehicles

Our tests. We anonymously buy production models at retail. All vehicles are preconditioned for about 2,000 miles. Tire pressures are set to manufacturer specifications.

Government tests. Automakers are allowed to use hand-built prototypes.

Driving conditions

Our tests. All testing is done outdoors year-round, never during precipitation, with all results adjusted to a standard temperature of 60° F. For gasoline-electric hybrids, we start our tests with the battery at the charge level you normally find--about half. A calibrated fuel-flow meter is used to measure gas consumption.

Government tests. EPA fuel-economy tests are done in a laboratory with the test vehicle's drive wheels resting on a dynamometer, which has a roller that allows the automobile to simulate driving while remaining stationary. Gasoline consumption is calculated based on the amount of carbon emitted from the vehicle's tailpipe, which the EPA says is more accurate than a fuel gauge.

To test all-wheel-drive vehicles, automakers and the EPA remove the front prop shaft and adjust the inertia weight on the dynamometer to account for four-wheel-drive factors. To test hybrid fuel economy, the EPA method allows automakers to start with a fully charged battery.

The EPA tests represent driving in southern California at 75° F on a road with no curves or grades, which is ideal for optimizing fuel economy.

City mpg

Our tests. These tests are stop-and-go city-driving simulations on our test track, which has a total of 18 stops and 4 minutes of total idle time. Top speed is 40 mph. Two different testers each drive three runs for a total of six 2-minute, 40-second trials on every test vehicle. Total test time is approximately 16 minutes.

Government tests. The city test simulates stop-and-go city driving with 23 stops and includes 5 minutes and 35 seconds of total idle time. Top speed is 56 mph. A professional driver manipulates the gas and brake pedals to follow a prescribed schedule of acceleration and braking while monitoring progress on a real-time graph on a computer display. The test runs for 31 minutes.

Highway mpg

Our tests. The highway tests are run on a specific section of state Route 2 near our test facility in central Connecticut. Two testers make eight 5-mile runs at a constant 65 mph. The tests are run in both directions to limit the effects of wind and grade differences. Each run is timed and limited to 4 minutes, 38 seconds. Total test time is approximately 37 minutes.

Government tests. These tests simulate free-flow rural and interstate-highway driving. The professional driver starts from zero, maintains a fairly smooth speed averaging 48 mph, then slows to zero over a prescribed 12-minute, 30-second schedule. While under way, speeds range from 30 to 60 mph.

Other differences

Our tests. We run a test that the government doesn’t require: a one-day trip test, which reflects a mixed driving cycle. Five different engineers drive back-to-back on the same day over a 31-mile route that includes 26 percent (8.2 miles) freeway, 11 percent (3.6 miles) highway, and 63 percent (19.2 miles) stop-and-go driving conditions.

Government tests. Automakers conduct the fuel-economy tests and submit their results to the EPA for certification. The EPA retests 10 to 15 percent of the vehicles. The EPA says that less than 10 percent of the retests are significantly different than the original automaker tests.

The math

Our tests. Trials within each type of test are averaged and corrected for ambient temperature to produce our published city and highway mpg ratings and our one-day trip rating. Our published overall mpg estimate is calculated as an equally weighted harmonic average of the city, highway, and one-day-trip results.

Government tests. The raw test results are adjusted downward by 10 percent for city mpg and 22 percent for highway mpg, and a combined mpg is calculated as a weighted harmonic average using the two in a 55/45 city/highway ratio. Those adjusted figures are the ones published on vehicle fuel-economy stickers.

[katzjamr]

I am aware that CR has a state of the art test facility and they even lease it out to other testing organizations who lack those resources, however a '2 minute and 40 second' city cycle is not a realworld test for a hybrid. What it is is a short trip that is a gas mileage killer in the 400h. Also 60 F is rather cool for this battery and my experience with cool seattle mornings with the heat on and no AC, (55 F) is that temp is also a further drain on the hybrid system, i.e. the ICE runs much longer. Those cool mornings have cost me a surprising 4 mph on short trips, add in that CR testers are not used to the 'hybrid' style of driving and their 16 mpg result is not that surprising however wrong it is from real world results.

[donnaclegg]

Does anyone have an idea on why the headlights for the 400H were rated "poor" with the black filled-in circle?  They never mentioned why in the article.

Thanks!

Mike

←

I sent a question to CR and got this quick response from one of their test engineers ...

"The RX400h headlights have very good intensity and good width (which may be why you like yours), but their low-beam distance is quite short and the light cut-off is abrupt. The scoring for headlights strongly favors distance as that's directly linked to you seeing an obstacle early enough to brake in time."

Tom Mutchler, CR Auto Test Engineer

←

Thank you very much for the feedback. This confirms for me something I had originally thought. I brought this issue up to the Lexus dealership, complaining that when driving at night (or more noticeably on an upward slope), the headlights seem a bit low and don't appear to illuminate far enough ahead. They inspected the headlights and said their positioning was correct and that the HIDs are lower on the left side as to not blind oncoming traffic. I wonder if the headlights could be adjusted up a little anyways to fix this issue.

Thanks for your response,

Mike

Has anyone else found the performance of these headlights unacceptable? I was going down a dark road and when I reached an unexpected curve I almost ran off of the road. I did not have my brights on because of an oncoming driver but after this experience, I keep them on while driving a dark road. Does anyone know if these headlights are adjustable? I find them adequate in lighted areas but on a dark road they fail miserably.

[katzjamr]

mine give me no problem and the extra illumination makes up for any lack of distance. some owners have complained about the HID lites regarding distance and there is an adjustment to slightly raise them. your dealer will be able to do that for u.