Mkl22 Twincharged December 23, 2014 Share December 23, 2014 murano is 4speed and 2.5L 4cylinder. ↡ Advertisement Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shox87 4th Gear December 23, 2014 Share December 23, 2014 murano is 4speed and 2.5L 4cylinder. Thanks for correcting me Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuanyan128 2nd Gear December 23, 2014 Share December 23, 2014 Test drove all those you've shortlisted. I ended up with the CX7 from 2007 to 2010. Best looking of all, even until now. Good interior quality, great Bose sound system, Best handling of all. Till today, I still miss enjoying the ride. Any problems with the turbo? zero. Turbo charged technology has advanced so much since the millennium year. Look at now, all models from Merc, Bmw, Audi, Volvo, Volkswagen, Citroen (turbo diesel), Peugeot (turbo Diesel) are turbo charged. For day to day drive, it won't give much more problem than non turbo cars. You get power on demand (235BHP, 350NM) as and when you need to overtake, you pay 2.3l road tax for the power of about 3.5l non turbo engine power. Still pay lower than 2.5l Murano (170BHP, 245NM). For the benefit of those who are still in the big CC more power era, it is no longer applicable. It is now about horsepower, pulling power (torque), no. of gears (CX7 being the only 6 gears of the 4) last but not least power to weight ratio. There is really not a huge difference in terms of fuel consumption. I'll tell you why below. I get 7.4km per litre for my CX7. 60% city, 40% highway. Mostly kept within 2000rpm rev range, of course with occasional mid to high rev for fun and overtaking slower cars like Murano, CRV and RAV4 After I sold off my CX7 due to the need for MPV, I got a new Honda Odyssey 2.4l (180BHP, 215NM) for 2 years. Guess what, my consumption is 7.8km per litre. Only 0.4km per litre difference. The weight of CX7 is slightly heavier than Odyssey. FYI, the Odyssey has the same 2.4l engine as CRV and weighs also about 1.7 tonne. When COE when up, I sold off the Odyssey and bought a 2nd hand Nissan Presage 2.5l which is almost identical to Murano's weight and power. I got 7.6km per litre. Why? I guess due to lack of power, it takes more fuel to get up to cruising speed, 4 gears makes it worst as it's harder to keep the rev in the most optimal and efficient range. And now I'm driving a Volkswagen MPV with 2.0l TSI Turbo engine. Not as fun as CX7 but close to it. Consumption wise, 8km per litre. I can only say if you are able to get 8.5km/l for CRV and RAV4, you're consider the minority. For Murano, fat hope will you get 8.5km/l. You must remember all the mentioned models are damn heavy, what are you expecting right? You may think I'm bias but that's my past decision on the CX7 and afterward experiences on other similar weighing cars with and without turbo charged. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Observer 4th Gear December 23, 2014 Share December 23, 2014 Had the chance to drive both the CRV & Murano (rental cars) in the past. CRV seems to be the softer of both vehicles. Somehow the design feels weird to me cos of the double grille. Murano seems to be more fiercer and better looking of both vehicles, looks much bigger in size and better pick-up(2.5L) If i were you, i would prolly take the Murano, given the ruggedness & looks of the car. CRV does not feel solid enough IMHO. Hope this helps. murano is like a jacked up latio sport. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackfoo 1st Gear December 23, 2014 Share December 23, 2014 Hello everyone, I'm currently driving a Nov '05 Optra and wishes to upgrade to a SUV. I have done my sums and have shortlisted these 4 '07/08 models: 2007 Mazda CX-7 2.3 Turbo with Sunroof 2008 Nissan Murano 2.5 with Sunroof 2007 Toyota RAV4 2.4 with Sunroof 2007 Honda CRV 2.4 with Sunroof Please give me your honest feedback as to which model I should pick. As I am looking at about 7 year old rides, I am more concerned about their reliability. Fuel economy is less of a concern for me as my fuel bills are paid for by the company that I am working for. My brain tells me to go with RAV4 or CRV, but my heart prefers Murano and the CX7 for their added amenities. Thank you in advance for your kind advice! (: 5 months ago, my ride was rav4, now still driving a Toyota. miss my rav4. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shox87 4th Gear December 23, 2014 Share December 23, 2014 murano is like a jacked up latio sport. murano looks more pimped than crv. Dun you think so? which would u choose? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phillim 3rd Gear December 23, 2014 Share December 23, 2014 Test drove all those you've shortlisted. I ended up with the CX7 from 2007 to 2010. Best looking of all, even until now. Good interior quality, great Bose sound system, Best handling of all. Till today, I still miss enjoying the ride. Any problems with the turbo? zero. Turbo charged technology has advanced so much since the millennium year. Look at now, all models from Merc, Bmw, Audi, Volvo, Volkswagen, Citroen (turbo diesel), Peugeot (turbo Diesel) are turbo charged. For day to day drive, it won't give much more problem than non turbo cars. You get power on demand (235BHP, 350NM) as and when you need to overtake, you pay 2.3l road tax for the power of about 3.5l non turbo engine power. Still pay lower than 2.5l Murano (170BHP, 245NM). For the benefit of those who are still in the big CC more power era, it is no longer applicable. It is now about horsepower, pulling power (torque), no. of gears (CX7 being the only 6 gears of the 4) last but not least power to weight ratio. There is really not a huge difference in terms of fuel consumption. I'll tell you why below. I get 7.4km per litre for my CX7. 60% city, 40% highway. Mostly kept within 2000rpm rev range, of course with occasional mid to high rev for fun and overtaking slower cars like Murano, CRV and RAV4 After I sold off my CX7 due to the need for MPV, I got a new Honda Odyssey 2.4l (180BHP, 215NM) for 2 years. Guess what, my consumption is 7.8km per litre. Only 0.4km per litre difference. The weight of CX7 is slightly heavier than Odyssey. FYI, the Odyssey has the same 2.4l engine as CRV and weighs also about 1.7 tonne. When COE when up, I sold off the Odyssey and bought a 2nd hand Nissan Presage 2.5l which is almost identical to Murano's weight and power. I got 7.6km per litre. Why? I guess due to lack of power, it takes more fuel to get up to cruising speed, 4 gears makes it worst as it's harder to keep the rev in the most optimal and efficient range. And now I'm driving a Volkswagen MPV with 2.0l TSI Turbo engine. Not as fun as CX7 but close to it. Consumption wise, 8km per litre. I can only say if you are able to get 8.5km/l for CRV and RAV4, you're consider the minority. For Murano, fat hope will you get 8.5km/l. You must remember all the mentioned models are damn heavy, what are you expecting right? You may think I'm bias but that's my past decision on the CX7 and afterward experiences on other similar weighing cars with and without turbo charged. Used to own the CX7 too... loved it till now... made a little post in the thread "Budget Mid-Size SUV, please advise" some time ago, maybe TS should read that up, was reliable up until 120 - 140 k... that's when things started needing some replacing an repairs, kept it until about 240k. But at 120 - 140 k i think most cars would start to need some looking into right? Anyway it was a fun car and made heads turn whenever you drove by. If you're thinking of getting a 5-7 year old SUV or any car for that matter, be prepared to fork out something unless its one of those thats been kept really well by a preferable first owner (knew a guy who owned a Corona for ten years with less than 50k mileage on it). 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luvalive 1st Gear December 23, 2014 Author Share December 23, 2014 Dep for a 7yr old murano 2.4 seems to be ard 12 to 13k. Volvo s80 same age ard this too. Lol Know what? I have always loved the Volvo S80, from the first generation since I was in secondary school till now! The look is still very relevant to me and really does attracts me a huge load! (Except that my favourite car is now the XC60) So what's holding me back is the supposedly prohibitive Scandinavian maintenance cost. As such, I would still prefer to stick to Japanese rides for now - at least their repair costs are more affordable for me. Had the chance to drive both the CRV & Murano (rental cars) in the past. CRV seems to be the softer of both vehicles. Somehow the design feels weird to me cos of the double grille. Murano seems to be more fiercer and better looking of both vehicles, looks much bigger in size and better pick-up(2.5L) If i were you, i would prolly take the Murano, given the ruggedness & looks of the car. CRV does not feel solid enough IMHO. Hope this helps. Thank you for your kind inputs! (: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luvalive 1st Gear December 23, 2014 Author Share December 23, 2014 Test drove all those you've shortlisted. I ended up with the CX7 from 2007 to 2010. Best looking of all, even until now. Good interior quality, great Bose sound system, Best handling of all. Till today, I still miss enjoying the ride. Any problems with the turbo? zero. Turbo charged technology has advanced so much since the millennium year. Look at now, all models from Merc, Bmw, Audi, Volvo, Volkswagen, Citroen (turbo diesel), Peugeot (turbo Diesel) are turbo charged. For day to day drive, it won't give much more problem than non turbo cars. You get power on demand (235BHP, 350NM) as and when you need to overtake, you pay 2.3l road tax for the power of about 3.5l non turbo engine power. Still pay lower than 2.5l Murano (170BHP, 245NM). For the benefit of those who are still in the big CC more power era, it is no longer applicable. It is now about horsepower, pulling power (torque), no. of gears (CX7 being the only 6 gears of the 4) last but not least power to weight ratio. There is really not a huge difference in terms of fuel consumption. I'll tell you why below. I get 7.4km per litre for my CX7. 60% city, 40% highway. Mostly kept within 2000rpm rev range, of course with occasional mid to high rev for fun and overtaking slower cars like Murano, CRV and RAV4 After I sold off my CX7 due to the need for MPV, I got a new Honda Odyssey 2.4l (180BHP, 215NM) for 2 years. Guess what, my consumption is 7.8km per litre. Only 0.4km per litre difference. The weight of CX7 is slightly heavier than Odyssey. FYI, the Odyssey has the same 2.4l engine as CRV and weighs also about 1.7 tonne. When COE when up, I sold off the Odyssey and bought a 2nd hand Nissan Presage 2.5l which is almost identical to Murano's weight and power. I got 7.6km per litre. Why? I guess due to lack of power, it takes more fuel to get up to cruising speed, 4 gears makes it worst as it's harder to keep the rev in the most optimal and efficient range. And now I'm driving a Volkswagen MPV with 2.0l TSI Turbo engine. Not as fun as CX7 but close to it. Consumption wise, 8km per litre. I can only say if you are able to get 8.5km/l for CRV and RAV4, you're consider the minority. For Murano, fat hope will you get 8.5km/l. You must remember all the mentioned models are damn heavy, what are you expecting right? You may think I'm bias but that's my past decision on the CX7 and afterward experiences on other similar weighing cars with and without turbo charged. Thank you for your honest review! The main reason as to why I drop the CX7 from my consideration is the alarming 6km/l fuel efficiency that I will have to tahan once I take over the car. My current Optra gives me between 8 - 9km/l and I find this acceptable, although I can't help but to look enviously at my colleagues who are driving more efficient vehicles - like my colleague who averages 12km/l on his 1.8 Wish! As I work in sales, my fuel bills are paid for by the company. However, I am not comfortable with any vehicles that falls below 8km/l. I think this would be my floor threshold of acceptance. Although I have never yet been in the cabin of any CX7, I have come to believe that the ride is gonna be fun and I am going to love driving the CX7. Although "fun" in driving is a factor I value, I am also very concerned about reliability and the maintenance costs. I would prefer to be financially prudent and lose some fun factor yet get a better balance for drivability, reliability and the servicing costs. As such, I believe the CX7 is not the car for me but I thank you once again for sharing your thoughts on the CX7. As for the CRV, RAV4 and Murano, I visited some websites and read on random forums that the CRV and RAV4 can average 11km/l! That is an upgrade for me! As for the Murano, I am hoping it can at least give me 8km/l returns and I would be satisfied. murano is like a jacked up latio sport. Why would you say that? Is it the ride or the looks you are referring to? I hope you are not referring to the sluggish acceleration of the Latio on the Murano! 5 months ago, my ride was rav4, now still driving a Toyota. miss my rav4. I have driven the RAV4 before and I do like it too! However, it seems to be not as popular among our forum friends here. Used to own the CX7 too... loved it till now... made a little post in the thread "Budget Mid-Size SUV, please advise" some time ago, maybe TS should read that up, was reliable up until 120 - 140 k... that's when things started needing some replacing an repairs, kept it until about 240k. But at 120 - 140 k i think most cars would start to need some looking into right? Anyway it was a fun car and made heads turn whenever you drove by. If you're thinking of getting a 5-7 year old SUV or any car for that matter, be prepared to fork out something unless its one of those thats been kept really well by a preferable first owner (knew a guy who owned a Corona for ten years with less than 50k mileage on it). That is precisely my point of checking on the reliability and maintenance cost of these vehicles first before I really start going for test drives. And sadly, that is also one of the reasons I am dropping the CX7 from the contender's list. (: I hope the Murano or the CRV would be quite fun to drive too! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daidai Neutral Newbie December 24, 2014 Share December 24, 2014 Most likely both Murano & CRV 2.4 will probably return you ard 7- 7.5km/l since your optra gives you 8-9km/l. We used to have an optra & get about 10km/l. End of the day if you drive lots in city, I think you wont get much FC difference in a heavy SUV akin to Murano size. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mkl22 Twincharged December 24, 2014 Share December 24, 2014 even if the fuel bills are paid by the company, won't your boss question why you are claiming so much more than you colleagues? i would. if it is just a bit 10-20% more its fine but not double! unless you bring in double the sales. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Observer 4th Gear January 6, 2015 Share January 6, 2015 Thank you for your honest review! The main reason as to why I drop the CX7 from my consideration is the alarming 6km/l fuel efficiency that I will have to tahan once I take over the car. My current Optra gives me between 8 - 9km/l and I find this acceptable, although I can't help but to look enviously at my colleagues who are driving more efficient vehicles - like my colleague who averages 12km/l on his 1.8 Wish! As I work in sales, my fuel bills are paid for by the company. However, I am not comfortable with any vehicles that falls below 8km/l. I think this would be my floor threshold of acceptance. Although I have never yet been in the cabin of any CX7, I have come to believe that the ride is gonna be fun and I am going to love driving the CX7. Although "fun" in driving is a factor I value, I am also very concerned about reliability and the maintenance costs. I would prefer to be financially prudent and lose some fun factor yet get a better balance for drivability, reliability and the servicing costs. As such, I believe the CX7 is not the car for me but I thank you once again for sharing your thoughts on the CX7. As for the CRV, RAV4 and Murano, I visited some websites and read on random forums that the CRV and RAV4 can average 11km/l! That is an upgrade for me! As for the Murano, I am hoping it can at least give me 8km/l returns and I would be satisfied. Why would you say that? Is it the ride or the looks you are referring to? I hope you are not referring to the sluggish acceleration of the Latio on the Murano! I have driven the RAV4 before and I do like it too! However, it seems to be not as popular among our forum friends here. That is precisely my point of checking on the reliability and maintenance cost of these vehicles first before I really start going for test drives. And sadly, that is also one of the reasons I am dropping the CX7 from the contender's list. (: I hope the Murano or the CRV would be quite fun to drive too! yes the sluggish acceleration lol murano looks more pimped than crv. Dun you think so? which would u choose? i will choose ur gti u tutukueh lol Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honsan Neutral Newbie January 23, 2015 Share January 23, 2015 I have been driving CRV 2.4 for more than 10 years.. Started with Gen2 and Gen3 since 2008.. I am able to consistently clock 9 to 10km/l (65% hw, 35% city). The sound proofing is weak, but other than that I am very satisfied. Interior leather broke recently after 7 years as last year the car was under the Sun most of the time. Maintenance and parts are easy and cheaper to source. Go for it.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyngps 5th Gear January 23, 2015 Share January 23, 2015 (edited) Bro, other than Murano, I had driven the other 3 and I currently own a CRV. Here is my quick feedback. If fuel efficiency, it would be Rav4. I can get about 9-10 on Rav 4 but only about 8.5 for CRV and about 9 for cx7. If space, CRV is better. Cx 7 looks big exterior but slightly smaller in the interior. Rav4 about crv size. Soundproofing, cx7. My ride currently has soundproofing added and not too bad. Rav 4 is in between. Driving comfort - CRV for me. Cx 7 is ok. Rav4 is rougher. Spare parts. Rav4 and crv abt similar. Cx7 is costlier. Reliability - crv followed by rav4. Cx7 easier for wear n tear it seems. Wife - she likes crv. Lol. Edited January 23, 2015 by Andyngps 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoverofCar 6th Gear January 23, 2015 Share January 23, 2015 If you want better weight to power ratio....go for CX7. It is a turbo SUV so the power is there....For Murano, the car is comfortable but lack in power. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeriousGuy 2nd Gear January 23, 2015 Share January 23, 2015 I am driving a CRV , i bought it at 2007 , so far so good the car never give me a single problem yet , but my lock just deflect not long ago. was quoted to fix is 2k ,cause the motor deflect , i was like what the , but the workshop told me 2007 to 2010 CRV got locks problem , indeed it has , checked website Honda is recalling those lock problem ,but i didnt fix it cause it just will keep lock and unlocking itselfs when driving so its still okay, if you plan to buy a CRV , do look out for this Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
npatrick 1st Gear January 25, 2015 Share January 25, 2015 Nice Murano Videos. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyyyISQNCzI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onq8rXVe6Mo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onAOZbUBhwM Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DawnLee Neutral Newbie January 30, 2015 Share January 30, 2015 Got to test drive the All New Toyota Rav4 last month and I personally like it alot. Full review up in my blog with pictures here: http://ilovedawn00.blogspot.sg/2015/01/car-review-2015-toyota-rav4.html ↡ Advertisement Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In NowRelated Discussions
Related Discussions
Nissan Claims Toyota RAV4 Hybrid Fuel Economy Estimates Are Unrealistic
Nissan Claims Toyota RAV4 Hybrid Fuel Economy Estimates Are Unrealistic
[Spyshots] 2025 BMW Neue Klasse SUV (Next Generation iX3)
[Spyshots] 2025 BMW Neue Klasse SUV (Next Generation iX3)
2019 12th Gen Toyota Corolla Sedan
2019 12th Gen Toyota Corolla Sedan
2023 Corolla Cross Hybrid 2.0 - Technical, Features & Use
2023 Corolla Cross Hybrid 2.0 - Technical, Features & Use
[Official] 2024 Lexus LBX
[Official] 2024 Lexus LBX
Toyota Corolla Cross
Toyota Corolla Cross
Toyota Land Cruiser Mini
Toyota Land Cruiser Mini
[Official] 2024 Audi Q6 e-tron
[Official] 2024 Audi Q6 e-tron