2019 Jeep Renegade Limited 4x4Jil McIntosh OVERVIEW Jeep’s smallest ute gets a makeover PROSOff-road ability, comfortable seats, better-looking than before CONSLaggy passing power, not a lot of storage space, still kinda odd-looking VALUE FOR MONEYLimited has lots of features but doesnt quite look the price WHAT TO CHANGE?Fewer transmission gears might not be a bad idea HOW TO SPEC IT?I’d go all the off-road way with the Trailhawk Wow, is that the new one? That looks really sharp! Thats usually something I hear about an eye-catching sports car, but this interested onlooker was, instead, taking in my Jeep Renegade tester.Jeeps smallest sport-ute gets a makeover for 2019, including a tiny new turbocharged engine and a bit of a facelift. It still isnt a handsome beast, but it doesnt look as goofy-nerdy as it did before especially since its lost the white X marks in its taillights, which always reminded me of pedestrian crosswalk signs. (Or a Phillips-head screwdriver. –Ed.) The Renegade comes in five trim levels, starting with the Sport at $28,645, and rising to my top-line Limited tester at $35,045 (which ended up at $39,765 after several options were piled on). The mid-level North and Altitude can be ordered in front- or all-wheel drive, while the Sport, Limited, and the ultra-off-roader Trailhawk drive all four tires.The new engine is a 1.3-litre turbocharged four-cylinder that makes 177 horsepower and 200 lb.-ft. of torque, mated to a nine-speed automatic. Its standard equipment in the Trailhawk and Limited. In the other trim levels, its an option over a 2.4-litre four-cylinder that produces 180 horsepower and 175 lb.-ft. of torque. Despite its higher torque rating, the 1.3L can get wheezy when its asked for power. Its not helped by the transmission, which seems to be a combination of too many gears for its own good, along with its habit of reaching for the top gears as often as possible in the name of fuel efficiency. Its fine when youre cruising along city streets, but theres annoying lag when you really want to pass at highway speeds, for instance.The Renegade is agile, responding quickly and accurately to steering input. The steering weight is confident at higher speeds, but its easy to spin it around tight parking lots. I wish the mirrors were wider, though theyre square when they should be rectangular; as such, they dont reveal as much to the sides as Id like, even when theyre adjusted all the way out. The short wheelbase and relatively narrow track give it a bouncy ride that isnt impossible to live with, but its there. Chalk it up to one of those Jeep things you either understand, or you dont.The all-wheel system features a rear axle that automatically disconnects when the rear wheels dont need to be powered, for extra fuel savings. When rear traction is needed, it seamlessly and immediately reconnects. A dial lets you select settings for snow, sand, or mud, as well as to lock the axles at low speeds for the extra sticky stuff. The Trailhawk is the true rough-stuff rebel of the bunch its surprising just how off-road capable it is, thanks to a Rock setting and 20:1 low-range crawl ratio exclusive to its system but the Limited will still get you through most tougher-than-average conditions.The Renegades interior styling is plain but functional, which is fine in the lower trims, but the expanses of hard plastic looked a bit out of whack with my testers nearly $40,000 price tag. Still, everythings put together very well, and there are some neat styling cues, including a passenger-side handle integrated with the air vent, a handsome steering wheel, and stereo speakers embossed with the signature Jeep grille. This is a small vehicle, and the interior reflects that. The front seats are roomy enough for all but the tallest folks, and I really like the seating position and seats that stayed comfortable on a five-hour drive, but those in the rear seats will notice a lack of knee room if the front seats arent slid considerably forward. The cargo compartment is equally narrow, with a maximum of 524 litres of space when the rear seats are up, although an adjustable cargo floor panel gives you some storage flexibility.All Renegade trim levels include air conditioning, push-button start, heated mirrors, and Bluetooth audio streaming, but you have to go one step from the Sport to the North to get dual-zone automatic climate control, Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, and automatic headlamps. At my Limited tester, the goodies include a customizable instrument cluster, 40/20/40 split-folding rear seat with a pass-through (the others are 60/40), a 115-volt power outlet, an auto-dimming rearview mirror, heated seats and steering wheel, rain-sensing wipers, and a 12-way power-adjustable drivers seat.Just about everything is simple and easy to use, including climate control functions operated with big buttons and a dial. The heated chairs and wheel are
Origin: SUV Review: 2019 Jeep Renegade Limited 4’4
Limited
Reader Review: 2019 Chrysler Pacifica Limited S
Kenton Smith with the 2019 Chrysler Pacifica.Brendan Miller/Postmedia Kenton Smiths first family hauler was a 1999 Dodge Caravan. The Calgarian says he left the minivan world behind years ago but recognizes the market has evolved.We owned that vehicle a long time ago, and I tried to keep that from my mind as I drove the 2019 Chrysler Pacifica, essentially a reimagined minivan Smith explains.Consumers initially saw the Pacifica name on a midsize CUV that Chrysler built from 2004 to 2008. The name was dormant until Chrysler retired its Town and Country minivan, replacing it with the re-designed from the ground up and re-branded Pacifica in 2016. Then, the Pacifica rolled out on an all-new platform with dynamically styled (for a minivan) sheet metal. Updates for 2019 are minimal, apart from some new paint colours and appearance packages. A 3.6-litre V6 engine that produces 287 horsepower and 262 lb.-ft. of torque is paired with a nine-speed automatic transmission, and in Canada the Pacifica is available in seven trim levels, from base L to Limited. The minivan is also available as a plug-in hybrid.It looked smaller than I expected it would, Smith says of his first impression of the Pacifica Limited he drove that was finished in a $245 extra-cost Billet Metallic paint. His Limited with the Sport appearance package rang in at $64,260.He says, Theres something about the Pacificas proportions that make it look more compact to me, likely because its not as tall. The Sport package included larger 20-inch aluminum wheels finished in black. That blacked-out theme carried over to many of the exterior accents and badging, while the entire interior was black with Light Diesel Grey highlights and an S logo in select areas.I had no issue getting into the minivan, Smith says. The doors werent gigantic, but there was lots of space for my legs and it only took a moment to get settled in. I found the controls were close at hand, but there was a knob you turned to select the gear rather than a lever I found that odd at first.With a lever, the movement is guided and you dont often have to check if youre in Drive or Reverse. With the knob, I always double-checked because every notch or click in the rotation felt the same.Smith was impressed with the overall fit and finish, and says it leaned towards luxury vehicle quality. The Nappa leather seating surfaces on the heated and cooled front seats was grippy and the four-way power adjustable lumbar provided plenty of support.Instrumentation was clear and featured two large dials on the left and the right of the gauge cluster with a screen between the two that was configurable to display various vehicle information Smith mostly left it set to show vital trip statistics, including fuel economy.When I talk about it looking compact, Smith says, and continues, I felt that it drove big. It didnt have a very tight turning radius, and that always makes a vehicle feel bigger to me.Acceleration from a stop was great, it would get up and go but the transmission didnt feel well-suited to the engine. Merging or getting up to speed to pass, you really had to stomp down to get it to downshift.It has what it needs, but I just felt the gearing could have been better.Power aside, Smith says overall handling was great. The suspension was well-tuned, and he felt confident pushing the Pacifica through corners when taking on and off ramps. And, he always felt well-connected to the vehicle as it responded to his steering inputs.While spending the majority of his week-long test commuting in the city, Smith did travel north on the QEII Highway to Red Deer.It was comfortable on the highway and it handles well, Smith says. It was very windy with a significant cross breeze, and it felt impacted by that wind. Its been a couple of years since Ive had a minivan so I may just be forgetting what its like.It was a little noisier than I would have expected, and that was mostly road noise rather than wind noise, a bit surprising given the significant wind. There was rain on this trip, and the rain-sensing wipers worked well when rain was intermittent.The two sliding rear passenger doors and the liftgate are power-operated and were foot-activated. Smith says this feature worked well and was especially nice to have when approaching the Pacifica with hands full of packages.Theres lots of space behind the power-folding third row seats for storage, Smith says. I never did put the Stow-n-Go second row seats into the floor, but theyll fold flat and leave a level cargo area. You cant beat a minivan for that carrying capacity. Ultimately, while Smith liked the Pacifica, he had trouble wrapping his head around the price.In my opinion, I think youre getting up into the dollar figure of a luxury SUV, and there are lots of options when youre going to spend that much on a vehicle, he says, and concludes, But dont get me wrong, it was a great utility vehicle with a compromise between sport and luxury and you
Origin: Reader Review: 2019 Chrysler Pacifica Limited S
Pickup Comparison: 2019 Ford F-150 Limited vs. GMC Sierra Denali
Eighty grand is a lot of dough. Enough to buy three Honda Civics, a cottage lot in Northern Ontario, a down payment on a triplex in Calgary. Or the money could go toward one of the most luxurious pickups on the market today the 2019 GMC Sierra Denali or 2019 Ford F-150 Limited. Ram, too, has an expensive truck, of course, one with a better interior than either the Ford or GM; but this test is between the two top guns of the Big Three, the Denali and the Limited.Ford steps into the ring at a disadvantage right from the start: Its F-150 is starting to show age after a complete refresh of the truck in 2015 when it went to an all-aluminum body, followed by a mild update for 2018, while GMCs top-line truck presents with an all-new design and parts. The Sierra Denali is definitely the shiny new toy here, and it looks the part with a Great Chrome Shark mouth grille, more blingy chrome bits all around, 22-inch wheels and a trick, MultiPro tailgate that expands on what a tailgate can do. The Ford suffers a little because it looks similar to so many other F-150s, the dandelion of the pickup truck world, demarcated only by equally big wheels, subtle metallic grille and only some Limited badging here and there.Under the hoods, these pickups could not have more different approaches to power: Ford has diverted a bunch of 3.5-litre high-output Raptor engines from the assembly line to enhance the appeal of the top-line Limited. As such, the Limiteds turbo V6 trumps the Sierra for pure grunt, delivering 450 horsepower and 510 lb.-ft. of torque funnelled through the same 10-speed automatic used in the Sierra. The Denali, on the other hand, uses a good ol fashioned V8. Its 6.2-litre returns 420 horsepower and 460 lb.-ft. But heres the surprising part: Despite the Ford having more power and being about four-tenths of a second quicker to 96 km/h than the GM, according to Car and Driver, the Denali simply feels and sounds better overall. Oh sure, the Raptor V6 is quick, and it sounds throaty and meaty, but its just not as juicy as the V8. While both engines are smooth, even at wide-open-throttle, the Denalis 6.2 is chocolate cheesecake to Fords apple pie, delivering a richer experience. Thanks to the direct injection and Dynamic Fuel Management, which can shut down any number of cylinders to optimize power delivery and efficiency, the Denalis fuel economy was impressive, too, though it did fall short of the Ford overall. While a low of 10 L/100 km was registered on the highway in the Denali, our overall average was 13.1, while the Ford registers 12.6 overall but 11.2 highway close enough that neither of these trucks is more efficient than the other at the end of the day. That might not matter much anyway considering the cost of entry here. Both have automatic 4WD systems in addition to 2H, 4H and 4L.Where the Ford pulls ahead is in towing prowess, the F-150 able to haul up to 13,000 pounds with the proper package and set up, compared to the Sierras 9,300. Earning back some practicality in the face of outright muscle, the Sierra Denalis ProGrade trailering system and its comprehensive suite of trailering aides edges out those on the Ford, predictable given that the Sierra has newer technology.Both trucks have similar payloads close to 2,300 pounds and both ride very well, the quietness in each truck a testament to the amount of sound deadening and noise cancelling. Rough roads are, perhaps, somewhat better absorbed in the Denali, and its body exhibited less shake and shudder. The box of the Sierra is superior, too, having been widened roughly seven inches for a volume of 62.9 cubic feet on its 5-foot, 8-inch bed, compared to the 5-foot, 5-inch bed in Ford. The Denali bed can even be optioned in carbon fibre. But Ford has better LED cargo lighting because the bed lights are activated with a button inside the bed instead of a switch in the cab. As for tailgates, Fords fold-out step is okay, but the MultiPro twin gate is simply superior. The only hitch (pardon the pun) is the need to remove any ball hitch for the MultiPro before using it as a step, which would be a pain for those of us who leave hitches in regularly (and, no, its not against the law in most provinces to leave them in.) To prevent damage, the electronic tailgate will not drop the upper half if it detects a hitch in the receiver. GMs bumper steps are equally brilliant and can be used instead.GMs seat-mounted storage cubbies in the Denali are also useful, as are the storage bins under the rear seats, but Fords rear seats lift up to create a wide open area inside the cab, which can be useful for carrying big objects or, for contractors, lots of tools. Neither of these trucks is better, per se, in the back seat area, although the front seats in the Ford Limited clearly win for comfort and a massage function. One sit and youll be sold on these seats. Fords Limited also gets a massive, panoramic sunroof as opposed to a traditional sunroof in the
Origin: Pickup Comparison: 2019 Ford F-150 Limited vs. GMC Sierra Denali
SUV Review: 2019 Toyota RAV4 Limited
2019 Toyota RAV4 LimitedDerek McNaughton OVERVIEW AWD Compact Utility Vehicle with good practicality, but annoying quirks PROSSmooth ride, durability and dependability CONSNoises, lack of refinement VALUE FOR MONEYGood WHAT TO CHANGE?Make it quieter, especially the engine and cabin HOW TO SPEC IT?Trail Edition The last generation Toyota RAV4 was so good it received one of the higher scores handed out during a Driving.ca test drive. Sadly, the fifth-generation replacement isnt quite as excellent, at least not yet, suffering from a malady of quirks that detract from its sharp new looks.Oh, to be clear, I wanted to love the 2019 RAV4, which has undergone a complete makeover and borrowed design elements from one of our favourite vehicles of all time, the Toyota 4Runner. But a number of things about the new RAV4 came across as irritations. First and foremost was the growl from the engine any time throttle was applied.It sounds like my grandmothers Scamp, blurted my wife, who is never one to criticize. But she is not alone. Driving writer Brian Harper concluded the same thing twice, although he is far more sophisticated than me, pointing out the RAVs 2.5-litre engine had a rather discordant note. I suspect much of the growl of this engine comes from the high-compression nature of the Dynamic Force four-cylinder. The engine produces 203 horsepower (up from 179) and is paired with an eight-speed automatic that shifts well. Its odd, too, that it would sound so loud when its blissfully quiet during any kind of steady-state throttle. It was also highly efficient, registering 6.8 L/100 km during a 350-km highway drive at a steady 100 km/h. Our last best in the old model was 7.4. But applying throttle became a game of you go first: Perhaps our press unit was in need of some ECU tuning, or something, but every time I took off from a stop, even when trying to be gentle, the engine torque grabbed the front tires and pushed the CUV ahead, making smooth takeoffs difficult. Even when I anticipated the rush, and tried to counteract, the engine was still too eager, prematurely rushing the throttle too early most of the time. Overall, the amount of power is good. Passing is easy; but throttle mapping needs to be smoothed out, or perhaps its something drivers will get used to over time.The brake pedal also had a dishevelled feel notchy from rest, too much travel before initial bite, then only moderate bite for the amount of foot force applied. Sure Im being picky, but thats the point here, to underline the things that arent perfect for a brand with such a high reputation, for a model at the top of its game, for quality in a segment with so much competition. So, not enjoying the braking or acceleration didnt get us off to a good start. But the electric steering, too, didnt erase those initial gripes. Nothing is technically wrong with the steering, it just doesnt give much feedback or track as well as many other Toyotas. And then an inconsistent buzzing like an incoming text message on a phone set to silent mode (it wasnt anyones phone) came every now and then from somewhere under the drivers seat, as though some module or some switch was sending current somewhere it shouldnt. Either that or it could be part of the driveline. When AWD isnt required, the RAV4 disconnects the rear driveline, sending power only to the front wheels, and the ratchet-type dog clutches on both the front and rear wheel-shafts stop the driveshafts rotations. Maybe that was what we heard. All I know is that the sound occurred with irregular frequency. This Dynamic Torque Vectoring AWD with Rear Driveline Disconnect (a Toyota first) comes standard on non-hybrid Limited and Trail models. It can direct up to 50 per cent of engine torque to the rear wheels, as well as distribute it to the left or right rear wheel to enhance handling on- or off-pavement. Tire and road noise in the cabin was high too.Far more pleasing was the new rigidity of the unibody structure, making the RAV4 feel vastly more sound thanks to a 57 per cent improvement over the old. This tighter structure also helps absorb impacts to the suspension, which delivered a highly satisfying ride, exhibiting little lean in the corners. Selectable drive modes (including normal, eco, snow, mud and sand, rock, and sport) can tailor the experience, but Sport seemed to bring out the best of the compact utility. With excellent visibility due to small A-pillars and side-mirrors placed onto the doors, the RAV4 soaked in some coily country roads with a vigour that helped quell those early distractions with the pedals. Our Limited model also came with a camera-based rear-view mirror, which might be of use when the inside is so full of cargo you cant see out back, but looking into the camera mirror can be disorientating. A birds-eye monitor along with a backup and forward camera is useful, but the screen resolution could be better.While the new RAV4
Origin: SUV Review: 2019 Toyota RAV4 Limited
All about car 