CALL them soft-roaders, junior SUVs or, if you want to be a bit derogative, ankle-biters. Call them what you want, but you can’t deny the fact that they’re selling in droves. Nissan’s X-Trail has, for some time, been South Africa’s top-selling SUV. It outsells even good mainstream passenger cars! And the Hyundai Tucson is not far behind – the Korean’s superb value positioning makes it an attractive buy, even if you come into the market not specifically looking for an SUV. But now the latest incarnation of the vehicle that was at the forefront of the small SUV revolution, Toyota’s RAV4, has arrived and, for the first time, a diesel version is available.
COMPARATIVE TEST DESIGN
Toyota RAV4 16/20
Nissan X-Trail 14/20
Hyundai Tucson 14/20
If you think these vehicles are judged primarily by how well they perform off-road, then you’d be wrong. They are image/fashion vehicles for most, with high levels of versatility and practicality also being of major importance.
The new Toyota certainly remains instantly recognisable as a RAV4, with the same type of grille/headlamp treatment as before, but elsewhere the Japanese designers have exercised a bit more flair this time. There are strong sculpture lines on the sides, curvy details on the bonnet, and the rear-mounted fullsize spare wheel (on a sideways opening door) adds the required macho finishing touch. The RAV4 D-4D rides on attractive 16-inch wheels, and we measured the ride height as 190 mm. This is a bit low, and the exhaust looks particularly vulnerable. The arrival, departure and break-over angles are 32, 33 and 161 degrees, respectively.
Get inside and you could just as well have climbed into a neatly finished family saloon. There’s a decidedly upmarket feel to the RAV4’s interior, some testers even describing it as Lexus-like in design. And it certainly is spacious, with good head-, leg- and shoulder room all-round. The rear seats can slide forward and rearward individually, allowing either more luggage space at the cost of rear legroom, or vice-versa. With the seats slid as far forward as possible, the boot measures 368 dm³, which is certainly not bad, but only just beats the 352 dm³ of the X-Trail with its nonsliding rear bench. Move the RAV4’s rear seats back to free more legroom, and the boot shrinks to 288 dm³, which still beats the disappointing 248 dm³ of the Hyundai Tucson. In terms of overall utility space, the RAV4 (1 128 dm³) surprisingly loses out to both the Nissan and Hyundai.
One very impressive design detail of the RAV4’s load compartment is the inclusion of levers on the side of the boot walls that, once pulled, flip the corresponding seat forward.
The X-Trail has been on the market for a good few years now and, in terms of exterior styling, is starting to date. We know that a comprehensive facelift is scheduled for next year, but the current design is pleasingly chunky and certainly a bit manlier than the Toyota or Hyundai. If these cars were people, then the Nissan would be the one with stubble on his face… It has a 10 mm higher ground clearance than the Toyota and Hyundai, but that sidewaysmounted rear exhaust box looks very vulnerable. Its departure angle is 25 degrees, and the arrival angle is 28 degrees. Surprisingly, however, it has the worst breakover angle (138 degrees).
Inside, the X-Trail is ageing even faster. There is little coherence to the overall design, with the facia seemingly penned by not one, but a group of designers. As a result you get storage boxes littering the facia, but they all have differently functioning lids and some are poorly positioned. The placement of the instrumentation in the middle is another contentious issue – CAR is of the opinion that it is not easier and quicker to read.
In terms of space, the X-Trail loses out slightly to the RAV4 in terms of rear legroom, mostly because it doesn’t have the Toyota’s sliding rear bench. But in terms of overall utility space with the rear seats folded forward, it wins hands down with an impressive 1 408 dm³ of loading volume on offer. A full-size spare wheel is stored under the boot floor. And while we’re on the topic of the boot floor, it is made of hard plastic with no carpeting or rubber matting providing grip or protection.
The Tucson is an attractive vehicle with a very coherent, modern design. No wonder it sells so well. The long-wheelbase (2,63 metres), 195 mm ride height, and short front and rear overhangs give it not only a chunky stance, but also good approach (29 degrees), departure (29 degrees) and breakover (162 degrees) angles. We must say that the centre part of the exhaust system looks like it could end up being bashed if you want to test the latter figure…
Inside, you’ll immediately understand why the Tucson is significantly cheaper than the other two vehicles. There are acres of grey plastic everywhere, but, to be fair, the overall design is not bad. The Tucson’s boot, however, is disappointingly small (248 dm³), but fold the rear seats down and total utility space (1 232 dm³) actually beats the RAV4. Disappointingly, the small boot contains a space-saver spare wheel – which is certainly not ideal for this type of vehicle.
Rear seat passengers will find less headroom in the Tucson, and the rear bench is mounted too low, so you tend to end up in a “knees around the ears” type of seating position, but there is good foot space under the front seats.
COMPARATIVE TEST POWERTRAIN
Toyota RAV4 17/20
Nissan X-Trail 15/20
Hyundai Tucson 11/20
Toyota’s 2AD-FTV turbocharged and intercooled 2,2-litre, fourvalves- per-cylinder unit has common- rail direct injection and delivers 100 kW at 3 600 r/min and 310 N.m of torque between 2 000 and 2 800 r/min. The turbocharger features variable nozzle technology that improves engine response and fuel economy. Twin balance shafts are also fitted to the engine, to counter vibrations and reduce noise levels. The engine is mated with a six-speed manual gearbox. The RAV4 features Toyota’s Active Torque Control four-wheel drive system, which controls torque transfer between the front and rear wheels. This allows the vehicle to switch seamlessly from front-wheel drive to four-wheel drive as conditions change. There is no centre differential – instead, a new computer controlled electro-magnetic coupling is used. Active Torque Control uses sensors to monitor throttle opening, engine torque and speed, gear selection, vehicle speed and steering angle, and then selects one of three control modes for every driving situation.
In “Start-off” mode, the torque split is 55:45 to ensure good traction and acceleration from standstill. “Normal control” sees the system switching to front-wheel drive only when necessary to conserve fuel (when cruising on the highway, for example). But even in this mode the torque split can be 55:45, depending on the driving conditions. Finally, “Cornering control” increases the stability under cornering by monitoring the appropriate yaw rate that should be applied to the car. Of course, the driver can still lock the torque distribution at 55:45 by activating the 4WD LOCK switch on the facia.
Out on the road, you’ll never notice these systems. What you will notice, however, is the new engine’s amazing refinement. It is quiet at idle, and remains sweetrevving high up its range. There’s also a noticeable lack of any drivetrain vibration. The only thing we really must criticise is the clutch action – it “takes” very high, and very suddenly which, in some instances, can catch the driver unawares and lead to a stall.
When we tested the X-Trail 2,2D in April last year, we were very impressed with the engine’s refinement and power. The 2,2- litre engine also uses common-rail direct injection, and has a maximum power output of 84 kW at 4 000 r/min and 270 N.m of torque is on tap at 2 000. Although the Nissan is still a very impressive engine, the RAV4 has moved the game on. Compared with the new Toyota, the X-Trail’s engine no longer feels like a leader in terms of refinement or power. But it is mated with a very good six-speed manual gearbox which, mostly because of a better clutch action, is a delight to use.
A rotary switch next to the steering wheel allows the driver to select where the power should go. In 2WD, power goes to the front wheels only. In Auto, torque will be sent to the rear wheels if the fronts start slipping. And Lock engages permanent four-wheel drive.
The Tucson has the smallest capacity engine in this group (a 2,0- litre), but it is a willing unit, delivering an almost X-Trail-equalling 83 kW at 4 000 r/min and a maximum torque figure of 245 N.m between 1 800 and 2 500 r/min. Doesn’t sound bad at all, does it? Only problem is that you can only have this engine coupled with a four-speed automatic transmission. This, in itself, is theoretically not a problem, but the ’box fitted to the Tucson seems to really sap the engine’s power and, as a result, the driver tends to push down on the throttle quite a bit more. This leads to relatively poor fuel consumption, and a not ideal driving experience. Put the throttle down and there is a gap before anything happens. Then, when it eventually decides to kick down, the engine sounds rough and the noise levels become annoying. And as you’ll see from the performance figures, you’ll need to do this quite often. But it’s not only the gearbox’s fault – the Tucson weighs a hefty 1,8 tons, which is heavier than both the Nissan and Toyota.
COMPARATIVE TEST COMFORT AND FEATURES
Toyota RAV4 16/20
Nissan X-Trail 14/20
Hyundai Tucson 13/20
In GX specification, the RAV4 has seven airbags, electric power steering, power windows allround, height- and reach adjustment for the steering column, remote central locking, air-conditioning, and a built-in radio/CD player, amongst other items. We only really missed remote audio controls on the steering wheel and, perhaps, a sunroof.
Nissan’s X-Trail has just been given a minor “upgrade”, and this 2,2D SE model now features leather trim, electrically adjusted front seats and front side airbags (in addition to dual front ’bags) as standard. Otherwise, this Nissan’s features list remains as is… not that much more was needed. It still has a huge sunroof that stretches far back to the rear passengers, a superb sound system (radio/CD/tape) with remote audio controls on the steering wheel, airconditioning and a height-adjustable driver’s seat. But there are a few ergonomic flaws with the X‑Trail. Firstly, the controls for the electric mirror adjustment is mounted low down on the facia, requiring the driver to lean forward, which obviously doesn’t work because he/she can’t set the mirrors while seated in his/her correct driving position. Also, the steering wheel (only height-adjustable) is slightly offset to the right. With its good space all-round and airy cabin, comfort levels are good. The seats are certainly accommodating, but the substantial looking side bolsters flatter to deceive, providing only marginal lateral support.
The Tucson, being the cheapest car here, can be expected to be lacking in certain features. But in reality it is actually very well equipped. Standard items include; automatic climate control, dual front airbags, remote central locking, leather upholstery, sunroof, cruise control and power windows and mirrors. Very impressive.
Comfort levels are good, but there are one or two niggles. The front seats don’t offer enough rearward travel, and the squabs are a little short. At the rear, we’ve already mentioned that the bench is placed too low.
COMPARATIVE TEST PERFORMANCE AND BRAKING
Toyota RAV4 16/20
Nissan X-Trail 14/20
Hyundai Tucson 11/20
With its significant power and torque advantages, it comes as little surprise that the Toyota has the highest top speed (186 km/h) and rather quick acceleration (0-100 km/h in 10,87 seconds). In terms of overtaking grunt, the Toyota leads the way in most of our timed splits, but the Nissan is slightly faster when accelerating from higher speeds in top gear. The X-Trail is certainly no slouch, accelerating to 100 km/h in 12,69 seconds and on to a top speed of 178 km/h.
And the Tucson? Well, seeing as it is the heaviest, has the least power and an automatic transmission, we weren’t expecting great things… but we were expecting better than we got… The 0‑100 km/h sprint takes a laborious 17,44 seconds, and the top speed is 157 km/h. You’ll need to be careful when overtaking too, because it needs 22,27 seconds to get from 120 to 140 km/h. That is very, very slow…
The Toyota and Hyundai have ventilated front disc brakes and solid rear discs, whereas the Nissan adds rear ventilated discs. All three vehicles have ABS with EBD. The Nissan recorded the poorest average in our emergency stopping routine (3,2 seconds) and the Toyota the best (2,98 seconds). The Hyundai achieved a good 3,04-second figure but, nearing the end of this punishing test, the brake pedal started going soft and needed a very hard push. But the figures remained consistent.
COMPARATIVE TEST FUEL ECONOMY
Toyota RAV4 16/20
Nissan X-Trail 17/20
Hyundai Tucson 12/20
According to our calculated fuel index figure (a real world figure that should be achievable by anyone), the automatic Tucson is the thirstiest, requiring 9,2 litres/ 100 km, which gives it a range of 676 km on a 58-litre tankful.
The RAV4’s excellent performance shouldn’t cost you at the pumps, because its fuel index figure of 8,12 litres/100 km rates as very impressive. Its 60-litre tank gives it a calculated range of 739 km.
But it is the Nissan X-Trail that wins this contest by achieving a superb figure of 7,6 litres/100 km. With a full 60-litre tank you should be able to go on for nearly 800 km before needing to refuel.
COMPARATIVE TEST RIDE AND HANDLING
Toyota RAV4 15/20
Nissan X-Trail 15/20
Hyundai Tucson 13/20
You’re not going to buy one of these if a twisty mountain pass is your favourite bit of road, so the emphasis should very much be on ride comfort and stable, safe handling. The Toyota (MacPherson front struts and double wishbones at the rear) is equipped with Toyota’s Integrated Active Drive system that incorporates VSC+ which, in turn, integrates the RAV4’s traction control, ABS, stability control, Active Torque Control and electronic power steering systems.
The RAV4 has superb ride quality. In fact, it rides like a luxury saloon, absorbing bumps and road irregularities without transmitting much evidence thereof to the cabin. It should make for an excellent long-distance vehicle, especially if you also take into account the comfy seats. It doesn’t lose this feel on gravel roads either, always maintaining a calm, refined and stable attitude. Most buyers won’t mind that it’s not terribly good at taking corners – lots of tyre squeal and a surprisingly early on-set of understeer. When you venture into the bush, keep in mind the low ride height. Assisting you when pulling off on steep inclines is HAC (hill-start assist control), which prevents the vehicle from rolling back.
The X-Trail arguably handles and steers slightly better than the Toyota, but at the cost of a slightly firmer ride… which is why we’ve rated them equal here.
The Hyundai rides on MacPherson strut front suspension and a multi-link rear set-up. The ride is the firmest of this group, but rarely becomes uncomfortable, and the upshot is that body roll is limited. During normal driving, 99 per cent of the torque goes to the front wheels, but if slippery conditions are detected, up to 50 per cent of the torque can be sent to the rear wheels. Four-wheel drive can be engaged by pressing a button on the facia.
COMPARATIVE TEST VALUE FOR MONEY
Toyota RAV4 16/20
Nissan X-Trail 13/20
Hyundai Tucson 14/20
The Nissan’s recent upgrade has come at the cost of a small price increase – it now sells for R305 900. This makes it the most expensive vehicle here. Although the X-Trail still rates as very impressive, the new RAV4 is not only better, but also more aggressively priced at R294 400. The Hyundai is an odd one in this group. It is certainly cheaper (R259 900), but as our test has shown, it is cheaper for a few reasons – it doesn’t have the performance, refinement or upmarket feel of its two rivals. It counters with a very impressive features list, and as a result remains a good buy… but if you can stretch your budget to the Toyota, do so.
COMPARATIVE TEST VERDICT
Toyota RAV4 16/20
Nissan X-Trail 13/20
Hyundai Tucson 12/20
We included the Tucson in this test because, on paper at least, it comes across as a vehicle that buyers considering the RAV4 should take into account. It has very high spec, the advantage (to some) of an automatic gearbox, good looks and, if you believe the power/torque figures, a willing engine. But a combination of factors – extra weight, power-sapping gearbox and lack of low-down torque – count against it. The result is poor performance and a driving experience that can be frustrating, no matter how many comfort features there are in the cabin. Look past this, however, and the Tucson remains a very good, high value vehicle.
The X-Trail 2,2D was our champ, until now. Considering its age, the Nissan has nothing to be ashamed about, though. It still has good performance, excellent economy, a comfy – if slightly goofy – cabin and a good reliability record. But the new Toyota RAV4 D-4D is better. And the price is right too. For its comfort, refinement and power, the RAV4 D-4D convincingly takes the crown.