| BillG |
I'm starting to narrow down my list these two keep coming back as good option. I've driven the Pathfinder and liked it quite a bit.
Has anybody seen a write-up comparing the two?
thanks. |
|
|
| BillG |
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
If you're talkin' Nissan, I think the Murano is more the direct competition to the Pilot. The Pathfinder is more of a truck-based SUV. If you're looking for basic comparisons, Consumer Guide and Edmunds are pretty good:
http://auto.consumerguide.com/
http://www.edmunds.com/new/index.html
Thanks.
I am considering the Pathfinder and the Pilot into the same class because they both have third-row seating, V6 engines, and have comparable EPA ratings.
The Murano is interesting... but without third row seating. Even though this isn't our prime family vehicle, if I'm going to pay the price at the gas pump for driving an SUV, I'm going to want the ability to haul more than 5 passengers.
The Toyota Highlander V6 would also be a consideration. |
|
|
| jay |
quote:
Originally posted by BillG
Thanks.
I am considering the Pathfinder and the Pilot into the same class because they both have third-row seating, V6 engines, and have comparable EPA ratings.
The Murano is interesting... but without third row seating. Even though this isn't our prime family vehicle, if I'm going to pay the price at the gas pump for driving an SUV, I'm going to want the ability to haul more than 5 passengers.
The Toyota Highlander V6 would also be a consideration.
I've owned an '01 Highlander, the Pilot and now RX 330s, and prefer the Highlander or RX for my needs. But...
The Highlander has a third row, for sure, but it's a hunk of vinyl covered metal taking up space in the cargo area more than it's seating. And access to it is, well, non-existent. See the picture below. Looks like the rear seat in a '71 Pinto. At least some munchkins can access and use the Pilot's third row.:4:
And the implementation of the third row in a 4-Runner, if it's anything like a GX 470, is ridiculous, too. The seats down and in place are right against the rear door. There's absolutely no room, even for a grocery bag, unless it's empty.:eek: |
|
|
| cwa107 |
quote:
Originally posted by jay
SNIP...
At least some munchkins can access and use the Pilot's third row.:4:
And the implementation of the third row in a 4-Runner, if it's anything like a GX 470, is ridiculous, too. The seats down and in place are right against the rear door. There's absolutely no room, even for a grocery bag, unless it's empty.:eek:
The 4Runner's third row is useable for kids, worthless for adults. I had the opportunity to sit in the third row of the Pilot this week and was surprised to find that at 6'2, I was actually able to fit back there. I wouldn't call it comfortable, but it would be fine in a pinch. I've actually had 2 smaller adults (smaller than me) back there with no problems. |
|
|
| BillR |
I recently test drove a Pathfinder LE (I've decided to get an MDX).
I loved the engine but I found it very truck like in handling (I would be concerned with an emergency lane change on the highway).
The vehicle was very nice.
One problem I had was my line of sight with the seat all the way down lined up with the tint band on the windshield (I'm only 6' tall).
I don't need a 3rd row so I didn't look at at it. |
|
|
| BigDogDad |
quote:
Originally posted by BillG
Thanks.
I am considering the Pathfinder and the Pilot into the same class because they both have third-row seating, V6 engines, and have comparable EPA ratings.
The Murano is interesting... but without third row seating. Even though this isn't our prime family vehicle, if I'm going to pay the price at the gas pump for driving an SUV, I'm going to want the ability to haul more than 5 passengers.
The Toyota Highlander V6 would also be a consideration.
After reading thru this thread I thought you changed your mind on the 3rd row until I realized it was BillR's post and not yours!
In regards to paying the price at the pump... don't forget that the Pathy requires Premium Unleaded! |
|
|
| jrex |
quote:
Originally posted by BillG
I'm starting to narrow down my list these two keep coming back as good option. I've driven the Pathfinder and liked it quite a bit.
Has anybody seen a write-up comparing the two?
thanks.
I used to have an 03 Pilot and currently have an 05 Pathfinder. What info are you looking for? I'll try to help answer any questions you have. |
|
|
| tangotango99 |
| Well I test drove the Pathy and liked it but then I drove my Pilot and loved it.My04 240hp can hold its own against the Pathy any day except for towing and major off-roading.I have read a few post of Pilot stumbling off road.I plan to keep mine ON-ROAD.You should compare it with the 4-Runner both are "true trucks" |
|
|
| BillG |
quote:
Originally posted by BigDogDad
After reading thru this thread I thought you changed your mind on the 3rd row until I realized it was BillR's post and not yours!
In regards to paying the price at the pump... don't forget that the Pathy requires Premium Unleaded!
The Nissan website says to "Use regular unleaded fuel with 87 octane. For maximum power, use premium fuel."
Nissan website |
|
|
| BillG |
quote:
Originally posted by jrex
I used to have an 03 Pilot and currently have an 05 Pathfinder. What info are you looking for? I'll try to help answer any questions you have.
That is generous. Thanks.
I guess there are a few questions that come to mind.
Why did you switch to the Pathfinder?
The EPA numbers are 15/21 for the Pathy and 17/22 for the Pilot. Do you notice any real world difference?
Third row seating... which is more accessible / useful?
Anything you miss about the Pilot? |
|
|
| BigDogDad |
quote:
Originally posted by BillG
The Nissan website says to "Use regular unleaded fuel with 87 octane. For maximum power, use premium fuel."
Their online brochure says otherwise. In a comparison the Pathfinder shows Premium Fuel...
Comparison |
|
|
| jrex |
quote:
Originally posted by BillG
That is generous. Thanks.
I guess there are a few questions that come to mind.
Why did you switch to the Pathfinder?
The EPA numbers are 15/21 for the Pathy and 17/22 for the Pilot. Do you notice any real world difference?
Third row seating... which is more accessible / useful?
Anything you miss about the Pilot?
BillG
I didn't really "switch" to the PF, I sold my Pilot and got the PF about 6 months later when I realized my extended cab truck was not working for me and my 2 kids.
The Pilot did get a couple MPG better than the PF, but my mileage on the PF seems to be improving. The best I have gotten is 20.1 all hwy A/C on. The worst was about 14 when I first got it. I am averaging about 16 right now (7500 mi comb city 40% / hwy 60%). I think the Pilot averaged about 18 (city 30% / hwy 70%)
I would probably say the 3rd row in the Pilot is more accessable/useful. I think the 2nd row slides where it does not in the PF and the PF is 7 pass, not 8.
I can't really say that I miss anything about the Pilot. They are really pretty different vehicles in how they are designed. It is all in what you want.
Now...... why the PF instead of another Pilot........
I wanted a little more towing capacity than the Pilot offered. When I had mine I had a full size truck I used for towing so it was not an issue before.
I like the off-road capabilities of the PF. I do not do a lot of off-road driving, but when I want to do it, I do not want to be worried about what I am going through.
Side Curtain Airbags.......I have them now.
Would I buy another Pilot? Definately. I really did like it and it fit the need at the time. I don't think you can go wrong either way, it just depends on what you need your vehicle to do. |
|
|
| RFM |
quote:
Originally posted by BigDogDad
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by BillG
The Nissan website says to "Use regular unleaded fuel with 87 octane. For maximum power, use premium fuel."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Their online brochure says otherwise. In a comparison the Pathfinder shows Premium Fuel...
Hmm, Honda would never have such conflicting data in their info about the Pilot...well...except for that error about fuel grade in the 2005 manual...:rolleyes:
:2: |
|
|
| BillG |
quote:
Originally posted by jrex
Would I buy another Pilot? Definately. I really did like it and it fit the need at the time. I don't think you can go wrong either way, it just depends on what you need your vehicle to do.
Thanks for taking the time to comment.
Thinking about it some more... I *like* the improved off-road and towing capabilities of the PF, but I can't honestly say that I need them. It would be a rare case that I'd actually use them.
In my opinion, the Pathfinder is the clear winner in styling. I find the exterior of the Pilot to be very plain Jane, while the Pathfinder is more distinctive and fresh looking. The interior of the Pathfinder is also more attractive. I very much like the lift-window in the PF tailgate.
Feature for feature, the two are very close to the same. The Pathfinder does have better airbag coverage and dual-zone front temperature controls. I'm calling it a tie between 7 or 8 passenger seating. The third row is important, but it would be extremely rare that I'd want to put 3 people back there.
The Pilot also has a lot going for it. It comes out on top on JD Powers quality ratings, fuel economy, purchase price, and projected depreciation.
Although the base Pathfinder is less expensive, the Pathfinder appears to be $2k-$4k more expensive than the Pilot EX-L, depending on which Pathfinder trim level you select. (Hard to say whether the SE plus packages or LE is exactly the right match.)
The Pilot is projected to hold resale value better, while the PF takes a much bigger hit on first year depreciation. Of course, this is only an estimate since this is the intro year of the new PF.
I'm coming to the conclusion that the Pilot is the more practical & economical choice unless you really need the better off-road/towing capability of the PF. |
|
|
| GreenMachine |
quote:
Originally posted by BillG
I find the exterior of the Pilot to be very plain Jane
Wait for the 2006 Pilot then. It's supposed to get a face lift, hopefully a little more masculine looking. ;) Of course, not saying it's looks bad now as that is definitely not the case. :) |
|
|
| BillG |
quote:
Originally posted by GreenMachine
Wait for the 2006 Pilot then. It's supposed to get a face lift, hopefully a little more masculine looking. ;) Of course, not saying it's looks bad now as that is definitely not the case. :)
The 2005 isn't ugly, but it is certainly the SUV version of an Accord. Functional, but not particularly interesting.
If the 2006 is due for a facelift then waiting might be a good idea, though. |
|
|
| cwa107 |
quote:
Originally posted by BillG
I'm coming to the conclusion that the Pilot is the more practical & economical choice unless you really need the better off-road/towing capability of the PF.
I think that about sums it up nicely. For what most people need an SUV to do, the Pilot is a perfect choice. If what you really want is the utility and off-road prowess of a truck, the PF is a better choice. |
|
|
|
