Too expensive? No, I don't think so. Its priced almost the same as the crv.

You know what's really expensive? The Rav 4.

You can add the Kia Soul to that list narin diba? It has a VGT CRDi pa, so mas tipid or atleast mas powerful.

I checked out the Soul recently. I liked the ground clearance, and the space inside but the interior feels cheap. The Kia Soul sold here in the Philippines seems like a stripped down version of the Soul sold in other countries.

Mabuti sa Singapore maganda ang public transport. Eh dito sa atin, puro mga abusado mag maneho! Marumi pa!

Those popular 3rd-world diesel SUVs aren't even sold in their home countries much less in Europe or North America. Why? It would never pas their safety and emissions standards. I feel bad for the gaya-gaya Pinoy mentality that made these Fortuners & Monteros popular here, as if we have the wide roads and huge parking spaces for them. And most of them only have 1 or 2 passengers most of the time. Waste of space.

I don't see why the multitude of pickup-based SUVs are indicative of "gaya-gaya" mentality. These SUVs are great cars for majority of people for the ff. reasons:

1. Fuel efficiency - a Fortuner 2.5G or Montero GLX can do ~9 km/L in city driving, and with the cheaper cost of diesel, this leads to monthly fuel bills that are competitive with gas-fed subcompacts.

2. Durable chassis - because these are based on pick-ups with ladder frames, they are generally more impervious to the potholes and poor road surfaces that we have in the country. Try subjecting a sedan or even a car-based SUV like a Santa Fe to the same torture with a Fortuner, surely the Fortuner's suspension bits will last longer.

3. Seating capacity - 7-seater SUVs are popular because we're big on social stuff as Filipinos. It is not uncommon for us to have lots of kids (with yayas), or to have tito/tita/lolo/lola/ninong/ninang ride with us on the occasional out of town trips, or even to have that impromptu barkada road trip to Laiya. Having 2 extra seats for the occasional passenger/s is a nice feature to have for many.

4. Flood-fording capability - while it's not advisable to traverse through floods when you have the option not to, sometimes the going gets rough and you have to pass through some flooded street to be able to pick your child up from school where he's been stranded for hours since classes have been suspended. Knowing that your SUV can handle knee-deep floods is more reassuring than being in a low sedan, and that sense of confidence is enough buying impetus for many.

5. Large luggage space - even if you're just a family of 3, having enough space for your outdoor gear, your weekend's worth of luggage, and your entire cupboard's worth of groceries is enough reason for many to buy a ladder-frame SUV. Sure you can fit a bike in a Jazz, but then you'll only have space for one passenger. These pickup-based SUVs may not have the flattest and lowest floors or most creative seat-folding mechanisms, but they have space - lots of it.

This makes it no surprise why people buy pickup-based SUVs in droves. They're very practical machines.

Of course, this is not to say that these SUVs are the perfect match for absolutely everyone. They aren't without fault. For one, these SUVs are nowhere as comfortable as equivalent CUVs (CR-V, Forester, etc), and especially to equally-priced midsizers (Camry, Accord, etc). And since they're based on trucks, they handle like trucks (lots of body roll, poor braking, etc). Also, since these are developed specifically for SEA markets, not much focus is given to refinement, so you shouldn't be expecting much from their simple interiors. They're also double the price of your entry-level minicar (Mirage, Rio, etc) so they're not exactly cheap. Furthermore, weaving in and out of traffic or parking slots isn't particularly easy because of the sheer heft of these vehicles.

Yet, at the end of the day, sales figures suggest that these drawbacks are ultimately minor compared to the benefits of these SUVs.

Bottomline: Filipinos love crude, smoke-belching diesel vehicles and have a fondness of cramming a whole lot of people inside their car similar to those overloaded jeepneys we see on the streets. Its more fun!

So what's wrong with crude (subjective - lots of people are fine with the refinement of a Fortuner, even if it's miles away from a 1st world Prado) diesels?

It gets the job done and fulfills the needs of the typical upper middle class Filipino family doesn't it?

At the end of the day, isn't practicality the top of mind for many? It's the main reason why these IMV vehicles (Fort, Innova, etc) are selling like hotcakes.

LOL... "practicality". Hahaha. You're really funny... Oh wait, you're not kidding?

Well let me tell you, these cars are "practically" pieces of crap. Low quality smoke belching vehicles like these belong in the junk yard, much like those truck and jeepneys. That's also the same logic why so many dumb people still buy the crosswind and adventure. "Practical" daw kasi. Hahaha.

Why the fuck are you still concerned about horspower and torque figures? The thing that's important in these times is fuel efficiency. They must have toned down the power to increase the efficiency. The fuck, its not like you're gonna race the x-trail, you don't need that extra power.

Because some people prefer performance over fuel efficiency?

Not everyone thinks like you, bud.

Yeah, some people are ignorant and stubborn. That's why they still drool over high power figures.

By refusing to acknowledge other points of view and differing tastes, I think we know who's the ignorant and stubborn one here.

Just because you're not willing to pay for additional fuel expenses in exchange for better engine performance under acceleration or top-end speed, doesn't mean noone else is willing.

If my FC drops from 7 km/L to 6 km/L but in exchange I get much better punch whenever I floor the throttle, that's a fair tradeoff.

Also, higher power figures don't automatically mean inferior fuel economy. Sometimes, if the power to weight ratio is better, you stress the engine less and in turn it delivers better fuel economy. I take it you've never owned a 1.6 Mazda 3 so you don't know how low power leads to awful FC.

In any case, it's careless to assume that lower paper specs for the X-Trail automatically translate to poor performance. Same goes with FC - unless someone has tried a real-world test on our actual roads, all of your arguments are moot and academic.

Yes but since this is a new model, I'm assuming that Nissan made the fuel efficiency better than its predecessor. Those lower power figures are the result of their tests for the best balance of power and efficiency.

Also we're not in the 90's anymore. Its idiotic to waste fuel. I'd throw the extra power away just to help the environment. Unless you don't give a fuck about the environment, just like those uneducated PUV drivers, its wiser to choose a more efficient car in these times.

Again, you can only conclude once real world tests are done.

And if you're being such a prick with regards to fuel efficiency, take the fucking public transpo. Oh, what was that? Too inconvenient for you? Well guess what, you're part of the problem too.

Subcompacts and minicars are a good middle ground for those who need personal transport but are being bitches about environmental impact (btw I work for an oil company and I tell you, you'll die first before crude oil runs out). But subcompacts don't have the space, ground clearance, and performance that these CUVs do.

People choose different cars to suit their needs. Just because their preferences don't match yours doesn't make them idiotic and you brilliant.

Ok! Good point. Now lets waste more oil and let the next generation suffer! Hooray for the existence of carbon emissions!

This preachy, white-knighting, whiny prick should stop visiting car sites

Are you referring to this new x-trail? Have you tried it?

Yes, I'm referring to the new X-Trail. I've tried it and even a gymnast will have a hard time fitting themselves in the useless 3rd row seats.

How did you try it when its still not sold here? Are you from a different country?

Ever heard of the Philippine International Motor Show?

Ever heard of 3rd row folding seats?

Uh, yeah? Like I said, I tried the 3rd row folding seats of the X-Trail and they're practically useless.

I find the Fortuner's 3rd row to be cramped, but this is a whole new level of tiny.

Next time, when you try to make a snide comment, make sure it makes sense.

Of course it will not make any sense for the unintelligent.

If you don't want to use the 3rd row, then fold it. It probably won't disturb you in any way. Its just there in case of a situation where you need to carry some extra passengers for a short distance.

If he wants a car with no vestigial 3rd row (that still takes up luggage space even when folded), then he's entitled to his own opinions.

everybody here expresses his or her opinion and gets bashed. pause and check - no one is ramming these ideas down your throat to force you to think the same. it's just expressions of opinions. if you guys can't handle it, get the fuck out.

btw, i have two fords, a 2011 eddie bauer explorer and a 2011 escape, one gives me 5km/l and the other 6km/l. i wouldn't trade the FC for any less power when i go on beast mode on the crappy compacts and sedans. so there, bash all you want

If you are not in a hurry, then wait for additional info first of actual units. The 2.0 of the xtrail might actually require you to run it with premium unleaded (95 RON) instead of just regular unleaded (91 RON). It might be a similar case with the Sylphy where the 1.6 recommended to run on 95 RON but the 1.8 is recommended to run 91ron only. We are no sure yet.

In terms of fuel efficiency there are statements coming out for the jc08 cycle of the xtrail 2.0/2.5 hovering between 16 and 14 km/l more or less. Which are actually commendable for a vehicle of such size. The problem is whether it applies to a fully laden vehicle or just with 2 pax. Not sure yet.

I actually really like the new Xtrail but I would wait for additional info. Haven't tested the back seat though and a lot are complaining about it. It is however a functional option in an emergency and just consider it a 5 seater + 2 in case of emergency.

But if you are okay with the Mazda 3, why not go with the 2.0 instead of the Mazda 3 speed? Save the cash you will be spending on the Mazda 3 speed and use that for other expenses you can do to the car if the 5 seater is "enough" for you in terms of space.

My two cents. =)

Thanks for the response! b/w mazda speed and mazda 2.0, im choosing mazda speed bec i will only add 1,500 on my monthly amort. That's kind of acceptable to get the add ons. Though i'd wish they included the backup camera so i wouldnt have 2nd thoughts initially. but if im paying cash, forget the mazda speed :) Do u think that's a fair assessment?

Not in a hurry but id really love to get a new unit within the next 2months. Mazda has a long line so i should act fast. While xtrail will only arrive in november but they have this introductory price only until october 31. So that again put pressure on me.

Iv been a fan of the new mazda3 since i read about it and saw it in the express way last month. But then the big space and new look of the new xtrail kind of made me rethink my options, as they are priced almost similarly. My thinking now is to get the mazda bec of the daily drive from house to office . Plus the toys that i wont get with the entry variant xtrail. Also bringing the xtrail everyday to work might be tiring and less fun compared to driving a mazda3. But i really love the space inside of the xtrail. With mazda i worry the low ground clearance, and having 5passengers might be hard to carry (or can mazda actually pull it off with 5 passengers?). See... that's how confused i am right now... haha! More thoughts pleaseee :)

100,000 now or 100,00 + interest split into several years is the same thing. Be financially smart about it and consider if you really need the extra features of the Mazda 3 Speed. It will still add up to over 100k so I don't understand why 100k now is less acceptable than 100k++ over a couple of years. That 1,500 a month for a span of a few years that you'll be spending for Bose speakers could've been used to pay for your phone bill and other utilities.

The 3rd row of the X-Trail isn't even useful for emergency situations where you need space for 7 people. To fit 7, you will have to move the 2nd row seats all the way forward (leaving space equivalent to the backseat of a Genesis Coupe). When you do this, the 3rd row will have enough space equivalent to the backseat of a BRZ (which isn't much, I tell you). A trip longer than an hour would definitely have both 2nd and 3rd row occupants in terribly inconvenient states.

However, if you don't force the 3rd row, the X-Trail offers much more space than the Mazda 3. It also has much higher ground clearance which could be useful for you if you live in an area with occasional floods.

Ultimately though, I will choose the Mazda 3 because it's cheaper, looks better, is more fun to drive, and is equally capable of meeting my needs in a car.

Hi! Thanks for the response and giving me good advice! :)

On the mazda speed diff, I guess i wouldnt be bothered shelling out 1500 a month getting a couple of upgrades rather than paying it upfront. Incase in the futur id like to get upgrades such as the skirts and good speakers, I wont have the luxury to spread it out for 3yrs or more, thus bigger cash out. Plus i think i can divert my unnecessary spendings a month to pay for this upgrade. But i agree, 100k spread in say 5yrs is still 100k :) I just thought paying 20k vs 21k a month doesnt make much difference. So im opting the latter to get the bose and powerseats. Not too keen about the skirts at this point. Changing side mirror and rims in brilliant black, plus the ivory white leather seats are not really upgrades for me. So i don't count them. Power seat is really cool btw! I just wish the pax seat was the same. On the rim in brilliant black, not sure if it was better than the original color. What do u guys think?

Agree on the issue on the 3rd row seat if the xtrail. Looks very cramped but incase of emergency, that's a welcome feature. I also like that you can adjust the 2nd row seats back and forth, and you can lean backward forward too. It just feels very spacious inside comparing to cx5 and crv. I just really want to know how good the handling is and how fuel efficient this will be. Havent found consistent reviews yet.

This is why im so torn choosing b/w this two cars. But seems im leaning towards the mazda 3 given that i will use this daily with just me driving. .. but value for money i guess i should choose the extrail. More advice please! :)

You'll never know when you're going to need the extra ground clearance of the xtrail. In my experience, going to the province is a pain in the ass when using a sedan. In case of an emergency when you need to go off roading, the sedan will get beaten up. Also some parking lots and speed bumps are poorly constructed and may scrape the front bumper of the mazda 3. The ground clearance is an ofter overlooked aspect when choosing a vehicle and one which you'll regret later when the damage has already been done.

But shouldn't you also consider what rpm should the engine be running to achieve those numbers? It's not all about peak power figures right? You should also consider when these can be achieved as well in my opinion.

If you got a 110hp car vs a 120hp car. The 120 hp does seem to be a better option if the weight difference is around 50kgs between the two. But if 110hp can be achieved at 3000rpm while the other at 4000rpm, then shouldn't that also matter?

My two cents.

It's no longer just a Power issue, but also a combination of achieving good power along with efficiency.

Since you're used to driving a honda city, I'm sure you'll have no problems with the ground clearance of the mazda 3. Sanay na umiwas sa road imperfections.

Which is a better choice, the Mazda CX 5 or the New X-trail? Thanks.

None of the above. CR-V is the best.

Hard to give a verdict on the X-Trail without having driven it first. But it's definitely more spacious than the CX-5.

I doubt however that it will have driving dynamics as good as the CX-5, which for me is even better than most compacts. Hardly any body roll and predictable steering and handling make you forget you're driving a CUV.

As to the commenter who claims the CR-V is best, it depends on your criteria, but it definitely isn't a runaway winner.

The best trait of the CR-V is that it's very spacious, both for passengers and cargo. Clever seat folding mechanism too so loading things is hassle-free.

Fuel efficiency is pretty okay for a CUV, but not as good as a CX-5. Performance is also just so-so, slower than most other CUVs but decent enough for the average driver.

Features and pricing are also so-so, it's not severely lacking in features but it's not exactly cheap either.

Overall, the CR-V just isn't as convincing to me as the other cars in its class.

I've always considered the CX-5 as the best option, with the only major drawback being that it's cramped. If space is a priority, the Forester wins my vote because it's almost as athletic as the CX-5 but with much more room.

Lastly, from a personal aesthetic standpoint, the CR-V looks hideous.

Don't listen to this guy. The CR-V is the best, you won't regret getting one.

You are most likely the same guy. But you should stop spamming your concern already if you can't even answer a simple question.

Would you prefer a CUV over a sedan or vice versa? If can't narrow it down it won't be solved. You already know the pros and cons between a CUV and sedan. So that should already help you. Don't add more vehicles without bothering to narrow down the type of vehicle as the price point is not an issue for you anyway.

No matter what we say, the decision lies with you and you already know the pros and cons from various posters. Then take those in mind and decide for yourself. If you find yourself leaning to a CUV, then that's the time to ask whether captiva or xtrail. Until then, decide the type of vehicle first, because your sedan option is only 1 vehicle anyway.

Cheers!

malabong mangyari yan sa site na to...

"Flash" daw. Hahaha. The irony.

Grabe to'. Sobrang talino mo talaga. Hahahaha! Pati flush di alam ang tamang spelling. Idol!

that's why i'm asking for a comparo..just to read those wild comments..lol