MT Compares Murano, Santa Fe, and Edge

[cp-the-nerd]

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/suvs/1507_2015_ford_edge_nissan_murano_hyundai_santa_fe_sport_comparison/

 

1st Place - Nissan Murano V6

4048 lbs

260 hp/240 lb-ft

0-60: 7.4 sec

 

2nd Place - Hyundai Santa Fe Sport 2.0T

3983 lbs

265 hp/269 lb-ft

0-60: 9.3 sec

 

3rd Place - Ford Edge Sport 2.7T

4406 lbs

315 hp/350 lb-ft

0-60: 5.7 sec

 

All vehicles cost roughly $40,000. Ford sent them an Edge Sport because that's allegedly all they had. It was an odd comparison to follow because you have the three vehicles occupying completely different performance personalities. If anything, the Edge was hurt by the sport package because it wasn't comfortable or fuel efficient compared to the other two. And then there was utterly abysmal acceleration from the Santa Fe 2.0T. What's the point of the 2.0T engine when it's no better than the base 2.4L GDI?

 

While this was a pretty scathing review for the new Ford Edge in its top trim, it seems like all the Nissan really had to do to win was land in the Goldilocks zone out of the 3 cars. It also had a surprisingly good looking and functional interior. The VQ V6 posted the best fuel economy of the trio.

[David]

Ford continues to show their Bloat. 4400+ pounds OUCH!

[Drew Dowdell]

The new Murano is really good. 

[cp-the-nerd]

The new Murano is really good. 

 

I can't get past the new exterior design language. Well that and the CVT. I'd be inclined to at least try the Edge Sport at the same price point as the others.

[Drew Dowdell]

 

The new Murano is really good. 

 

I can't get past the new exterior design language. Well that and the CVT. I'd be inclined to at least try the Edge Sport at the same price point as the others.

 

 

The CVT is super smooth and paired with the VQ is nicely refined.   When you consider what the Murano is meant to be,  comfy family cruiser rather than sports car, the CVT makes sense.

[cp-the-nerd]

 

 

The new Murano is really good. 

 

I can't get past the new exterior design language. Well that and the CVT. I'd be inclined to at least try the Edge Sport at the same price point as the others.

 

 

The CVT is super smooth and paired with the VQ is nicely refined.   When you consider what the Murano is meant to be,  comfy family cruiser rather than sports car, the CVT makes sense.

 

 

I don't think CVTs ever make sense, so that argument falls on deaf ears. Of course if the gearing war continues at 9 speeds and beyond, my opinion of conventional automatics wont be any better.

[Drew Dowdell]

 

 

 

The new Murano is really good. 

 

I can't get past the new exterior design language. Well that and the CVT. I'd be inclined to at least try the Edge Sport at the same price point as the others.

 

 

The CVT is super smooth and paired with the VQ is nicely refined.   When you consider what the Murano is meant to be,  comfy family cruiser rather than sports car, the CVT makes sense.

 

 

I don't think CVTs ever make sense, so that argument falls on deaf ears. Of course if the gearing war continues at 9 speeds and beyond, my opinion of conventional automatics wont be any better.

 

What doesn't make sense?

[cp-the-nerd]

 

 

 

 

The new Murano is really good. 

 

I can't get past the new exterior design language. Well that and the CVT. I'd be inclined to at least try the Edge Sport at the same price point as the others.

 

 

The CVT is super smooth and paired with the VQ is nicely refined.   When you consider what the Murano is meant to be,  comfy family cruiser rather than sports car, the CVT makes sense.

 

 

I don't think CVTs ever make sense, so that argument falls on deaf ears. Of course if the gearing war continues at 9 speeds and beyond, my opinion of conventional automatics wont be any better.

 

What doesn't make sense?

 

 

I have no desire to ever own a CVT equipped vehicle. As much as a conventional auto takes away from driver involvement and feel versus a manual, a CVT takes it that much further. I don't condone the appliance mentality so wide spread in the U.S., we invented the automotive society, and we seem to be the first to take it for granted and suck the life out of it.

 

I also read that the CVT feel is one of the #1 complaints about Nissan cars from consumers, so I'm not just some crotchety conservative 28 year old!

Edited July 7, 2015 by cp-the-nerd

[David]

I have no desire to ever own a CVT equipped vehicle. As much as a conventional auto takes away from driver involvement and feel versus a manual, a CVT takes it that much further. I don't condone the appliance mentality so wide spread in the U.S., we invented the automotive society, and we seem to be the first to take it for granted and suck the life out of it.

 

 

I also read that the CVT feel is one of the #1 complaints about Nissan cars from consumers, so I'm not just some crotchety conservative 28 year old!

 

RESPONSE:

 

My 28yr old son has a Jeep Patriot Trail Rated edition and is fine with the CVT. As he says, "Dad, as long as I get up the mountain to snowboard and get around, who cares about the transmission type." He is more about use of the auto than about the components and I think most of the 20 to 30 year olds see auto's like their cell phone, a tool to use and ignore.

[FAPTurbo]

Edged out by a Hyundai? How embarrassing. That's too bad for Ford because I like the Edge over the other two. However, the choice to include hard, sport seats in the top-tier model is mystifying... it's not a Mustang. 

 

And lol! The 'automotive society' is why you're all diabetic, diseased and 'obesed.'

 

Cars have always been an appliance for 90% of the population. Any perceived 'closeness' with cars in a prior era is purely based on wishful nostalgia, and the fact that cars were utter garbage before 1990. 

 

Enthusiasts too easily confuse the idea that people in 1950 - 1970 - who had to top off their oil every 12 miles and buy a new car every three years because the current one rusted into the owner's post-war ranch's flowerbed - were more 'appreciative' of cars. 

[cp-the-nerd]

Edged out by a Hyundai? How embarrassing. That's too bad for Ford because I like the Edge over the other two. However, the choice to include hard, sport seats in the top-tier model is mystifying... it's not a Mustang. 

 

And lol! The 'automotive society' is why you're all diabetic, diseased and 'obesed.'

 

Cars have always been an appliance for 90% of the population. Any perceived 'closeness' with cars in a prior era is purely based on wishful nostalgia, and the fact that cars were utter garbage before 1990. 

 

Enthusiasts too easily confuse the idea that people in 1950 - 1970 - who had to top off their oil every 12 miles and buy a new car every three years because the current one rusted into the owner's post-war ranch's flowerbed - were more 'appreciative' of cars. 

 

I was referring to other parts of the world, like Europe, where people still appreciate driving and almost all cars offer manual transmissions--and with high take rates too. Also, technically it's the electronic/computer age making us fat not so much cars. The auto industry has been booming for much longer than the obesity epidemic in the US.

[Drew Dowdell]

 

Edged out by a Hyundai? How embarrassing. That's too bad for Ford because I like the Edge over the other two. However, the choice to include hard, sport seats in the top-tier model is mystifying... it's not a Mustang. 

 

And lol! The 'automotive society' is why you're all diabetic, diseased and 'obesed.'

 

Cars have always been an appliance for 90% of the population. Any perceived 'closeness' with cars in a prior era is purely based on wishful nostalgia, and the fact that cars were utter garbage before 1990. 

 

Enthusiasts too easily confuse the idea that people in 1950 - 1970 - who had to top off their oil every 12 miles and buy a new car every three years because the current one rusted into the owner's post-war ranch's flowerbed - were more 'appreciative' of cars. 

 

I was referring to other parts of the world, like Europe, where people still appreciate driving and almost all cars offer manual transmissions--and with high take rates too. Also, technically it's the electronic/computer age making us fat not so much cars. The auto industry has been booming for much longer than the obesity epidemic in the US.

 

 

People in Europe drive manuals because up until very very very recently, manual transmissions were much more efficient than automatics and provided substantially better performance in low displacement/low power engines.  Also, automatics were a substantial upcharge in frugal post-war Europe. If you're buying a Vauxhall Astra, an automatic transmission could be 10% - 15% increase in sticker price. 

 

Europe's fondness for the manual has nothing to do with "appreciating driving" and everything to do with $10 per gallon gasoline (adjust for inflation as you go back in time).

 

The only reason that manuals are still popular in Europe even though automatics have achieved efficiency parity is that old habits and opinions are hard to break. 

[cp-the-nerd]

 

 

Edged out by a Hyundai? How embarrassing. That's too bad for Ford because I like the Edge over the other two. However, the choice to include hard, sport seats in the top-tier model is mystifying... it's not a Mustang. 

 

And lol! The 'automotive society' is why you're all diabetic, diseased and 'obesed.'

 

Cars have always been an appliance for 90% of the population. Any perceived 'closeness' with cars in a prior era is purely based on wishful nostalgia, and the fact that cars were utter garbage before 1990. 

 

Enthusiasts too easily confuse the idea that people in 1950 - 1970 - who had to top off their oil every 12 miles and buy a new car every three years because the current one rusted into the owner's post-war ranch's flowerbed - were more 'appreciative' of cars. 

 

I was referring to other parts of the world, like Europe, where people still appreciate driving and almost all cars offer manual transmissions--and with high take rates too. Also, technically it's the electronic/computer age making us fat not so much cars. The auto industry has been booming for much longer than the obesity epidemic in the US.

 

 

People in Europe drive manuals because up until very very very recently, manual transmissions were much more efficient than automatics and provided substantially better performance in low displacement/low power engines.  Also, automatics were a substantial upcharge in frugal post-war Europe. If you're buying a Vauxhall Astra, an automatic transmission could be 10% - 15% increase in sticker price. 

 

Europe's fondness for the manual has nothing to do with "appreciating driving" and everything to do with $10 per gallon gasoline (adjust for inflation as you go back in time).

 

The only reason that manuals are still popular in Europe even though automatics have achieved efficiency parity is that old habits and opinions are hard to break. 

 

 

I'm pretty sure that's over simplifying. Otherwise why would European manufacturers, particularly German ones, pride themselves on sharp handling and dynamics? Why are automatics still typically relegated to older or disabled folks that can't comfortably work 3 pedals? Maybe at one point there was necessity, but it seems to have also spawned a culture of people that enjoy fun-to-drive cars and prefer to shift their own gears.

[David]

 

 

 

Europe's fondness for the manual has nothing to do with "appreciating driving" and everything to do with $10 per gallon gasoline (adjust for inflation as you go back in time).

 

The only reason that manuals are still popular in Europe even though automatics have achieved efficiency parity is that old habits and opinions are hard to break. 

 

 

I'm pretty sure that's over simplifying. Otherwise why would European manufacturers, particularly German ones, pride themselves on sharp handling and dynamics? Why are automatics still typically relegated to older or disabled folks that can't comfortably work 3 pedals? Maybe at one point there was necessity, but it seems to have also spawned a culture of people that enjoy fun-to-drive cars and prefer to shift their own gears.

 

Would be interesting to have a list of the German auto companies and the sales by category.

 

Automatic

Dual Clutch semi manual trans

Manual trans

 

I suspect that MB, BMW, Porsche and Audi are selling few sticks in comparison to automatics.

[Drew Dowdell]

 

 

 

Edged out by a Hyundai? How embarrassing. That's too bad for Ford because I like the Edge over the other two. However, the choice to include hard, sport seats in the top-tier model is mystifying... it's not a Mustang. 

 

And lol! The 'automotive society' is why you're all diabetic, diseased and 'obesed.'

 

Cars have always been an appliance for 90% of the population. Any perceived 'closeness' with cars in a prior era is purely based on wishful nostalgia, and the fact that cars were utter garbage before 1990. 

 

Enthusiasts too easily confuse the idea that people in 1950 - 1970 - who had to top off their oil every 12 miles and buy a new car every three years because the current one rusted into the owner's post-war ranch's flowerbed - were more 'appreciative' of cars. 

 

I was referring to other parts of the world, like Europe, where people still appreciate driving and almost all cars offer manual transmissions--and with high take rates too. Also, technically it's the electronic/computer age making us fat not so much cars. The auto industry has been booming for much longer than the obesity epidemic in the US.

 

 

People in Europe drive manuals because up until very very very recently, manual transmissions were much more efficient than automatics and provided substantially better performance in low displacement/low power engines.  Also, automatics were a substantial upcharge in frugal post-war Europe. If you're buying a Vauxhall Astra, an automatic transmission could be 10% - 15% increase in sticker price. 

 

Europe's fondness for the manual has nothing to do with "appreciating driving" and everything to do with $10 per gallon gasoline (adjust for inflation as you go back in time).

 

The only reason that manuals are still popular in Europe even though automatics have achieved efficiency parity is that old habits and opinions are hard to break. 

 

 

I'm pretty sure that's over simplifying. Otherwise why would European manufacturers, particularly German ones, pride themselves on sharp handling and dynamics? Why are automatics still typically relegated to older or disabled folks that can't comfortably work 3 pedals? Maybe at one point there was necessity, but it seems to have also spawned a culture of people that enjoy fun-to-drive cars and prefer to shift their own gears.

 

 

There is always a subculture that likes crisp driving dynamics, but the firmer rides you talk about are more a byproduct of the better quality roads (at least in Germany).  Prior to about 2000, only BMW did much with the really sporty driving.  Benzes may have been crisper than your grandmother's 83 LeSabre, but they weren't what we'd call sporting... either today or in 1983.  

 

They were (are still) heavy, boaty, and back then saddled with slow diesel engines.  I assure you there is absolutely nothing sporting about a 1993 Mercedes Benz C-Class with a 111 horsepower non-turbo diesel... so you can imagine what the 90 horsepower non-turbo diesel 1983 model was like.   The Volkswagen Rabbits of the late 70s were extremely popular.... and they handle like crap.  They came with a range of diesel engine sporting 49 horsepower, 53 horsepower, and an autobahn shredding 69 horsepower.   Even with the original 3-series, most cars were sold with horsepower ratings in the double digits.

 

The automatics in these cars were usually 3-speed autos while the manuals were typically 5-speeds (unless you got a really stripper Rabbit with a 4-speed manual)

 

So no... it isn't over simplifying things.   Manuals cost a lot less to operate in a time and region with high fuel costs, manuals cost a lot less to buy, and they enabled the driver to wring every last ounce of performance out of grossly underpowered engines.    It wasn't out of some love of driving that the Europeans stuck with manual transmissions, it was just the most practical solution to the environment they were in..... and for the most part the Europeans stick with manuals more out of habit than anything else. 

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

This is a strange comparo?

So let's see, they could not stop raving about the power and sound of the engine.

They were impressed that with all that power and AWD that it still got 24mpg.

They loved the interior materials and layout.

They thought it handled impressively.

They love the styling and space.

 

But they basically did not like the suede seats, shifter feel and old Sync system.

 

 

Hmmm.

[El Kabong]

This is a strange comparo?

So let's see, they could not stop raving about the power and sound of the engine.

They were impressed that with all that power and AWD that it still got 24mpg.

They loved the interior materials and layout.

They thought it handled impressively.

They love the styling and space.

 

But they basically did not like the suede seats, shifter feel and old Sync system.

 

 

Hmmm.

Just so we're clear: this is the same poster who regularly dismisses the Escalade's lack of utility versus the Navigator, who now attempts to go to bat for a Ford that MT placed last for its lack of user-friendliness.

Yeesh

[oldshurst442]

 

 

People in Europe drive manuals because up until very very very recently, manual transmissions were much more efficient than automatics and provided substantially better performance in low displacement/low power engines.  Also, automatics were a substantial upcharge in frugal post-war Europe. If you're buying a Vauxhall Astra, an automatic transmission could be 10% - 15% increase in sticker price. 

 

Europe's fondness for the manual has nothing to do with "appreciating driving" and everything to do with $10 per gallon gasoline (adjust for inflation as you go back in time).

 

The only reason that manuals are still popular in Europe even though automatics have achieved efficiency parity is that old habits and opinions are hard to break. 

 

 

 

 

There is always a subculture that likes crisp driving dynamics, but the firmer rides you talk about are more a byproduct of the better quality roads (at least in Germany).  Prior to about 2000, only BMW did much with the really sporty driving.  Benzes may have been crisper than your grandmother's 83 LeSabre, but they weren't what we'd call sporting... either today or in 1983.  

 

They were (are still) heavy, boaty, and back then saddled with slow diesel engines.  I assure you there is absolutely nothing sporting about a 1993 Mercedes Benz C-Class with a 111 horsepower non-turbo diesel... so you can imagine what the 90 horsepower non-turbo diesel 1983 model was like.   The Volkswagen Rabbits of the late 70s were extremely popular.... and they handle like crap.  They came with a range of diesel engine sporting 49 horsepower, 53 horsepower, and an autobahn shredding 69 horsepower.   Even with the original 3-series, most cars were sold with horsepower ratings in the double digits.

 

The automatics in these cars were usually 3-speed autos while the manuals were typically 5-speeds (unless you got a really stripper Rabbit with a 4-speed manual)

 

So no... it isn't over simplifying things.   Manuals cost a lot less to operate in a time and region with high fuel costs, manuals cost a lot less to buy, and they enabled the driver to wring every last ounce of performance out of grossly underpowered engines.    It wasn't out of some love of driving that the Europeans stuck with manual transmissions, it was just the most practical solution to the environment they were in..... and for the most part the Europeans stick with manuals more out of habit than anything else. 

 

Ive been saying this over at Motor Trend for years now.

Mostly, I was targeting BMW and sometimes I kept it to bash all  European cars when some Euro snobby folk at Motor Trend would get a tad too cocky.

 

But then again...Buzz...hit the nail on the head with American cars during the 1950s-1970s...but like I always said...if American cars were a million times better than Euro cars during the good 'ol days, imagine how awful Euro cars were during that time frame. And Japanese cars for that matter.

 

The wishful thinking nostalgia comes from the fact that Detroit build muscle cars during that time frame. Muscle cars were actually affordable. Well, at least in the beginning they were.

Then Hollywood did the rest...but...Drive-in theatres and Route 66 and cruisin' and street light to street light drag racin' was real...so wishful nostalgia may be a tad too strong of a sentence...

 

However...Drive in Theatres, roller blading waitresses at the local Diner, Route 66 seeing the USA in your Chevrolet and street light to street light drag racing all include car activities that require NO TWISTIES AND NO MANUAL TRANSMISSIONS!!!  And THAT is part of the enthusiasm that America has with their automobiles...

Rock-N-Roll, cruising, Milk Shakes, and roller blading waitresses...is what its all about.

Sure...drag racing and 4 on the floor were manuals...and automatics were primitive back then...but it still doesnt change the fact that if Steve McQueen  missed his shift in a manual Hot Rod, then James Dean in his hydra-matic Oldsmobile would win the race...

Edited July 7, 2015 by oldshurst442

[ccap41]

 

The new Murano is really good.

 

I can't get past the new exterior design language. Well that and the CVT. I'd be inclined to at least try the Edge Sport at the same price point as the others.

 

I'd buy the edge just based on the looks over the other two alone. Even when it isn't in top trim. Then add in that it doesn't have a damn CVT or isn't Hyundai and BINGO. Okay, that was harsh on Hyundai.. I realize they made very good stuff now and compete with vehicles they would only dream of 15 years ago.. it would still be really hard for me to ever buy one.

 

I'm curious what the Edge weighs with the 2.0 and FWD and 2.0 and AWD just for comparisions sake because 4400lbs is heavy. But it is a v6 and two turbos, bigger intercooling and cooling in general with what..22 inch wheels? 21s? I think 20s would be more than enough, especially once you realize they(tires) don't last forever and will have to be replaced..that'll be a pricey bill, for even the cheap junk tires that I wouldn't even consider.

[Thed]

Just would like to point out that the Edge was friggin QUICK. Seriosuly. A 4400 LB CUV shouldn't be going that quick...

[Suaviloquent]

I don't think the Edge Sport was done justice here, but again, I think there's something missing here. MT set the criteria for being a comfy middle sized runabout with style; not a porky yet somehow athletic ute. But for the Edge to be third place; that's a tough sell. You're getting a ute that can run with a Porsche Macan for $4000 more than the Nissan. I'd say that's a bargain in its own right. Oh well. 

 

I'm sure buyers will test ride each and find what they like. I would go with the Edge personally, because I do not like the Murano's exterior, and my utter hate for it is greater than my like of the Murano's interior over the Edge. The minor squabbles over button placement; sure. Okay; but alteast it's no longer the atrocity that the touch panels were. I think the Sync 3 system should help a lot. 

[Drew Dowdell]

I think it was Ford, not the Edge, that lost this comparison.  By sending a vehicle so out of line with what was being requested, they set themselves up for failure.  Had they sent a Titanium AWD with the 302A Equipment group it would have been just slightly cheaper than the Murano.  Performance would have been the same and they wouldn't have been complaining about all the "sport" stuff in the seats and springs.

 

I've driven the Murano and the Edge Titanium back to back and there isn't much effective difference between the two. It would come down to aesthetics mostly.

[TaurusSHO]

I think it was Ford, not the Edge, that lost this comparison.  By sending a vehicle so out of line with what was being requested, they set themselves up for failure.  Had they sent a Titanium AWD with the 302A Equipment group it would have been just slightly cheaper than the Murano.  Performance would have been the same and they wouldn't have been complaining about all the "sport" stuff in the seats and springs.

 

I've driven the Murano and the Edge Titanium back to back and there isn't much effective difference between the two. It would come down to aesthetics mostly.

Agreed, seems like it only lost because they brought the Sport instead of a regular model.