Toyota C-HR Forum banner
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
G

·
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Got my copy today of Consumer Association (Which?) "Car Guide 2017/18 The UK's best and worst cars".

In the category of Compact SUVs & Crossovers, the CHR came 7th= with a score of 71%.
Top was BMWX1 (78%); then Subaru XV (76%); BMW X4 (75%); followed by Kia Sportage, BMW X3, VW Tiguan, Seat Ateca and CHR equal with the Porsche Macan.

Quote:
"PROS in a sea of crossovers and compact SUVs, the Toyota HR (sic) stands out with its beefy-but-contoured design. It's well-styled inside, too - and spacious for those sat up front. Generous equipment levels across the range, and a top safety score make it appealing.
CONS What might put you off is the poor rearward visibility and lack of rear-seat space.
VERDICT Striking and safe, but lacks practicality."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
177 Posts
I saw that too. I've never been that convinced of the Which car reports. All the cars I've owned have been criticised by Which. However I was pleased to see that they are estimating 51.4mpg which is exactly what I'm showing with all short (4miles approx) journeys totalling 530 miles from new.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
380 Posts
I think it's a fair verdict.
According to me the car looks stunning inside and out.
But it's trunk is a lot smaller than the competition.
The visibility is poor (luckly I have the blindspot monitor).
The satnav is prehistoric.
They say it's claustrofobic in the rear... don't know, never sit there.

So if you need a sensible family crossover/mini SUV... don't buy it. Buy a Seat Ateca or Skoda Karoq instead.

If you want something extraordenary and don't need all the practicallity... buy a C-HR.
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top