Seems like consumerreports.org is biased on rating autos. For example while I was looking at 2007 Subaru Forester, they gave 71 points on their 100 point scale while they gave 83 for 2007 Toyota Rav4 (Limited V6). They both are rated same in three of their four testing categories while in the acceleration category, Forester is given Good while Rav4 is given Excellent. I dont think this is fair for them to use a base model Forester (2.5 X) and suggest a Limited edition (V6 model) Rav4 as an alternative. Now this 71 point rating for Forester reflects for the whole trim levels. I wonder how much a base model Rav4 scores
.
I have also seen a crash test video of 2006 legacy sedan where they are comparing it with a Rav4 and concluding that Rav4 is more safer than Legacy in a side impact (ofcourse it should be since its a suv compared to a legacy sedan which stays low to the ground).
-Pavan.