What Most SUV Reviews Keep Getting Wrong About Real-World Driving

As 2025 models roll out with ever‑more complex tech — from hands‑free driving aids to plug‑in hybrid systems and massive curved displays — the gap between marketing and reality is getting wider. A useful SUV review today has to do more than summarize a press release: it needs to stress‑test the vehicle in the same messy, imperfect conditions buyers will live with for years.

Below are five critical areas where SUV reviews should go deeper, and what enthusiasts and buyers should look for (or demand) whenever they read or watch an evaluation.

1. Real-World Powertrain Behavior, Not Just 0–60 Numbers

Horsepower figures and 0–60 mph times still dominate headlines, but they tell only a fraction of the story. A meaningful review should focus on how an SUV’s powertrain behaves in everyday use: merging, passing, climbing grades with a full load, and creeping through traffic. For example, a turbocharged 2.0‑liter four‑cylinder that looks impressive on paper (260+ hp, 280 lb‑ft) can feel laggy if the torque peaks high in the rev range or if the transmission is slow to downshift. Reviewers should note how quickly boost builds, how the throttle responds in Normal vs. Eco/Sport modes, and whether the drivetrain ever “hunts” for gears on rolling highways.

Hybrids and plug‑in hybrids (PHEVs) add another layer. Does the electric motor provide immediate, seamless torque from a stop, or is there a noticeable handoff between electric and gasoline power? Is there enough electric power for short highway passes without the engine roaring to redline? For PHEVs, reviewers should log how far they actually drive on electricity at typical suburban speeds (e.g., 40–55 mph with light hills) versus the official EPA electric‑only range. They should also test how performance and drivability change once the battery is depleted and the system behaves like a traditional hybrid.

Transmission behavior deserves equal scrutiny. Continuously variable transmissions (CVTs) can either feel smooth and well‑tuned or disconnected and drony; a good review distinguishes between a CVT calibrated to mimic stepped shifts under load and one that simply flares revs. With traditional automatics (8‑, 9‑, or 10‑speed), the key questions are: Does it upshift too aggressively to chase fuel economy? Does it respond quickly when you ask for power? Are there noticeable clunks or delays when engaging Drive or Reverse during parking maneuvers?

Finally, reviewers should explicitly compare drive modes with the same stretch of road and similar traffic. Sport modes that only sharpen throttle without changing steering or transmission logic are worth calling out, as are “Eco” modes that sap too much responsiveness and become unsafe when short gaps appear in cross traffic. When a review highlights how the SUV behaves at 25, 45, and 70 mph in different modes, buyers get a far more accurate picture than a single 0–60 time ever could.

2. Ride, Handling, and Noise Evaluated Where You Actually Drive

Modern SUVs increasingly chase a dual personality: soft and quiet for commuting, yet composed and “sporty” for brand image. It’s common to see reviews praise highway comfort after a smooth, short press‑launch route, but what matters is how the suspension and chassis cope with the broken pavement, expansion joints, and patchwork repairs that most owners face daily.

A serious evaluation should include multiple surfaces: fresh asphalt, coarse concrete, cracked city streets, and at least a few sharp potholes or speed bumps taken at realistic speeds. Reviewers need to detail how the suspension reacts: does it thump and send shocks through the cabin, or does it absorb impacts cleanly and settle quickly? On models with adaptive dampers or “active” suspension, they should compare Comfort vs. Sport calibration using the same imperfect stretch of road, noting not only firmness but also body control — how quickly the SUV stops bobbing after a dip or speed hump.

Handling is equally critical, especially as SUVs grow heavier and taller with battery packs and panoramic roofs. Instead of vague comments like “stable” or “nimble,” look for specifics: how much body roll appears in a quick lane change at 60–70 mph, whether the front end washes wide (understeer) on on‑ramps, and how accurately the steering tracks when you make small corrections on the highway. Electric power steering tuning varies widely; a good review will mention on‑center feel (the sense of stability when the wheel is straight), steering ratio (do you need constant micro‑adjustments?), and any artificial heaviness in “Sport” mode that doesn’t actually add feedback.

Noise, vibration, and harshness (NVH) are becoming huge differentiators, particularly as EV and hybrid SUVs remove traditional engine masking. Reviewers should measure or at least comment on cabin noise at specific speeds — 35 mph urban, 55 mph suburban, 70–75 mph highway — and distinguish between wind noise around the mirrors, tire roar from aggressive all‑season or off‑road tires, and drivetrain whine in electrified models. Panoramic roofs can increase wind and road noise; good evaluations will compare models with and without them if possible.

Critically, reviewers should test loaded conditions: three to five passengers, cargo in the back, and possibly a modest trailer or hitch rack. Suspension tuning that feels controlled when empty can float, bottom‑out, or exhibit excessive rear sag under load, which directly impacts headlight aim and braking distance. Without this context, buyers only get half the story of how the SUV will behave when it’s actually being used as intended.

3. Interior Usability and Tech That Holds Up Beyond Week One

Because huge screens and flashy ambient lighting dominate marketing photos, many reviews still overemphasize first impressions and underreport long‑term usability. The most helpful evaluations dig into how the cabin works on a daily basis: control layout, storage solutions, and software reliability over time.

Climate controls are a prime example. Many 2025‑era SUVs bury them in touchscreens; reviewers should clearly explain whether there are physical knobs and buttons for core functions (temperature, fan speed, defroster) or if you have to dive through sub‑menus. Latency matters: a half‑second delay between tap and response becomes infuriating when you’re trying to adjust temperature while driving. On touch‑sensitive sliders, reviewers should check operation with gloves, sweaty hands, or minor finger misalignment — scenarios that real owners will face.

Infotainment systems need more than a mention of screen size and wireless Apple CarPlay/Android Auto. A quality review will detail boot‑up times, whether wireless smartphone mirroring reconnects reliably after short stops, and how quickly the system recovers if you’re moving between apps (e.g., Google Maps to Spotify back to the native navigation). With over‑the‑air (OTA) updates now common, reviewers should note whether major early bugs have been patched, and how transparent the automaker is about software change logs. Glitches like frozen backup cameras, audio dropouts, or random reboots should be documented — they matter far more than glossy UI design.

Interior storage and ergonomics must be tested with real objects, not just a tape measure. Cup holders should be evaluated with different bottle sizes; center consoles should be checked for depth and organization (can they hold a tablet, or do items rattle around?). Wireless charging pads vary enormously; reviewers should test whether they hold phones securely around corners, if they overheat modern large phones, and how consistently they maintain charging with cases on. Small but practical points — ventilated seat airflow intensity, reach to the touchscreen without leaning, ease of buckling a child seat without digging into bolsters — signal an SUV designed for actual people rather than showroom appearances.

For three‑row SUVs, tech and usability in the second and third rows are make‑or‑break. A thorough review will report whether third‑row passengers get their own vents, charging ports, and usable cup holders, and if the second row can slide forward enough to balance legroom between rows. Testing the mechanism for folding and tumbling seats, especially with child seats installed in the second row, is essential and too often skipped. Reviews that show or describe this process in detail provide massive value for families cross‑shopping competing models.

4. Safety and Driver-Assistance Systems Beyond the Brochure

Every new SUV now boasts a menu of acronyms: ACC, LKA, LFA, BSM, RCTA, and more. Many reviews simply list these features without examining how they perform in real traffic, conditions, or edge cases. The key difference between a competent system and an annoying one is calibration — and that only becomes clear during careful testing.

Adaptive cruise control (ACC) should be tried in heavy, inconsistent traffic and on open highway. A meaningful review will note how it handles cut‑ins (does it brake abruptly when another car dives into your lane?), how smoothly it comes to a stop and restarts, and whether it maintains a realistic following distance even on the closest setting. Lane‑keeping assist (LKA) and lane‑centering systems should be evaluated for their tendency to ping‑pong between lane markers, their reliability on faded paint or construction zones, and how easily they are overridden or temporarily canceled when you change lanes manually.

Systems branded as “hands‑free” or offering limited automated lane‑changes require especially rigorous scrutiny. Reviewers should test them in poor lane markings, varying sunlight, and gentle curves, not just perfect conditions. They should also comment on driver‑monitoring fidelity: Does the system nag aggressively even when you’re paying attention, or does it allow unsafe periods of distraction? Transparency about system limits is crucial; a responsible review clearly distinguishes between Level 2 driver assistance (which still requires constant human supervision) and anything implying higher levels of autonomy.

Passive safety should go beyond IIHS and NHTSA scores. Reviewers can add context about visibility from the driver’s seat: A‑pillar thickness, blind spots created by large side mirrors, and rear visibility with head restraints up. The clarity and resolution of the backup camera and optional 360‑degree camera system are also key; night performance, lens cleanliness in bad weather, and the usefulness of trajectory lines or transparent chassis views should all be reported.

Finally, reviews ought to address how easy it is to configure these systems. Can you set default preferences (e.g., lane‑keeping off by default, or a particular following distance) that stick after each restart, or do you have to dig into menus every drive? Some SUVs allow deep customization of alerts, steering assist intensity, and collision warning sensitivity; others bury vital settings or require the vehicle to be in Park to adjust them. That difference has a direct impact on whether owners will actually use the tech they’re paying for.

5. Ownership Costs, Battery and Fuel Reality, and Long-Term Durability Signals

A polished test drive says little about what an SUV will cost to own over five to ten years. As more electrified SUVs enter the market, reviewers must pair performance impressions with clear, data‑driven analysis of energy use, maintenance needs, and durability indicators — not just sticker price and EPA figures.

For gasoline and hybrid SUVs, city vs. highway fuel economy can differ drastically from EPA numbers depending on weight, tire choice, and driving style. Reviews should include observed economy over mixed routes with realistic speeds and loads, ideally broken down by city‑heavy and highway‑heavy drives. Large off‑road tires and roof‑rack accessories can easily knock 2–4 mpg off real‑world results, and that should be flagged explicitly. Hybrid SUVs should be tested with a depleted battery as well as a charged one to show worst‑case fuel economy when the system can’t rely on full regenerative advantages.

EV and PHEV SUVs demand honest range and charging assessments. Reviewers need to record actual energy consumption (kWh/100 miles or mi/kWh) at various steady speeds — 65, 75, and even 80 mph — and in different temperatures. Cold weather range loss, especially when using cabin heat, is significant and must be acknowledged. When fast‑charging, a thorough review logs the charging curve: how long it holds peak kW, where it tapers, and how long it takes to go from, say, 10–80% on a typical public DC fast charger. Claims like “10–80% in 28 minutes” only matter if reviewers verify they’re achievable outside ideal launch‑event conditions.

Maintenance and durability signals come from details: the recommended service interval for engine oil, transmission fluid, hybrid system coolant, and brake fluid; whether the SUV uses simple fixed‑caliper brakes or expensive multi‑piston setups; and if wearable items like tires are bespoke and costly. Reviews can point out whether the engine is a well‑proven design carried over from earlier models or a brand‑new architecture, and whether the transmission is shared with other high‑volume models (often a reliability positive) or unique and unproven.

Interior build quality also gives early hints at aging. Reviewers should push and twist interior panels to check for creaks, evaluate the robustness of seat mechanisms and folding third‑row hardware, and inspect frequently touched surfaces (steering wheel, armrests, console lids) for thin coatings that might wear quickly. For tech, they should note whether the automaker commits to a defined OTA support window and map update schedule, as infotainment obsolescence can effectively shorten a vehicle’s desirable lifespan.

Total cost of ownership discussions should integrate all of this: energy use, maintenance intervals, likely consumable costs, and expected resale value based on brand history and segment demand. Reviews that stop at “starting at $XX,XXX” and “it’s efficient for the class” are no longer enough in an era where buyers are keeping vehicles longer and tech is evolving rapidly.

Conclusion

SUV reviews are evolving, but too many still prioritize launch‑event gloss over the realities of daily ownership. Enthusiasts and serious buyers deserve evaluations that measure how powertrains respond in real traffic, how suspensions cope with bad pavement and full loads, how cabins and tech hold up to family life, how safety systems behave in edge cases, and what long‑term costs might look like — especially for hybrids and EVs.

When you read or watch your next SUV review, look for these five depth markers. If they’re missing, treat the verdict as incomplete. And if you’re a creator or reviewer yourself, pushing your testing to cover these areas won’t just make your content more trustworthy — it will make it far more shareable and valuable to the growing audience of buyers who want more than marketing gloss before signing on the dotted line.