(First posted 1/5/2014) The RAV4 is one of those cars that for some reason I’ve always liked but especially so in base form. It’s always seemed fairly sensible and doesn’t try to be something it is not. So as we were sitting around at Christmastime 2010 and started seeing the current lease deal on TV, I realized that I might actually be happy with the “teaser” version that was being offered for $199/month…
So we talked about it and decided to take a look. The thinking was we were going to unload the Honda Civic Hybrid and the Tahoe soon anyway (but not just yet) and that this might now be a good car for around town and other duties. Upon arriving at the local dealer, I met the internet sales rep who was a no BS kind of guy. He confirmed what I had seen on TV and showed me half a dozen RAV4s that fit the spec. He offered keys to whichever I wanted to try, so we pointed at the first one in line and my wife and I took it for a ride. Nice, actually very nice. When we got back I asked if they had a black one (they did) so I said OK, let’s do this.
After a short bit of paperwork (no hassles whatsoever) and a few signatures, we were on our way. It was that easy. Amazing how two people who were starting over, had both quit their jobs, and with no current income had no problem getting financing on a car just because their credit was excellent. Our old house in CA was closing that day as well so we had cash to show, but I kind of thought they would want more than they did.
First day of ownership, safely tucked in garage
So what did we get? Well, for $199/month over a 4-year term with nothing out of pocket, except for the government fees and taxes, we now had a brand new Toyota RAV4 with AWD, a 2.5liter 4cylinder engine, 4-speed automatic transmission, gray cloth interior, stability control, airbags everywhere, power windows/locks, AC, CD player, cruise control, floormats, 17” wheels, tinted windows, and roof rails. Not what comes to mind when I think base, but the minimum standards have apparently increased quite a bit. I believe the roof rails, the 17” steel wheels, and tinted windows were actually part of some kind of value package that was discounted back to zero on the sticker.
RAV4s for North America are assembled both in Canada and Japan. Ours was from Japan which I did not expect; I figured here in Colorado we’d get the Canadian one instead. In Japan, the RAV4 is built at Toyota’s sprawling Tahara plant, which is apparently their highest quality plant and which also builds the flagship Lexus LS460, amongst many other models.
The engine is a 2.5liter 4cylinder that is also used in the Camry of all things as well as the Scion tC and probably others as well. This engine produces 178hp@6000rpm and 172lb-ft of torque at 4000rpm. There was also a V6 available, and when I asked the salesman about it, he told me that I should drive the four cylinder first. If I liked it, I was told NOT to try the 6 because if I did, I would want that. Good advice, so I have never driven the six cylinder but it is interesting to note that for a time the RAV4 with the V6 was the fastest car Toyota offered in the US. Perhaps that says more about the company’s absence of sporty offerings for several years.
Anyway, the engine was great. Smooth, refined, willing to rev and very quiet when cruising. The transmission was also good. I don’t know why everyone is always going on about how horrible a 4-speed transmission is. These are usually the same people as those moaning about how expensive new cars are. In my mind, this particular one, at least, is a well developed, proven, reliable design that is probably inexpensive to build and repair compared to a newer design with up to twice as many ratios. If it’s not broken, why change it?
Since I had chosen a black one, the unpainted plastic door handles and mirrors blended right in. On the upper level Sport and Limited versions they are body color and interestingly, Toyota offers all three trim levels with both engines and both drive configurations (2WD/AWD), not something that every manufacturer does.
I actually like the 17” steel wheel design (as I do on the CRV competitor as well). It is large enough to look decent and the style looks like someone actually did what they could rather than just stamping out something round and made of metal. As a bonus, it comes with a matching 5th one mounted to the tailgate under a hard plastic cover: no space saver here! That hatch is side-hinged, but still hung correctly for right hand drive markets, which sucks when you are parallel parked and need to load or unload curbside without a ton of room behind you (such as when another car is parked there).
The cabin did not have many frills, but was no-nonsense and very functional. The steering wheel felt good and had controls for a mini trip computer built in. The audio system sounded fine, the HVAC controls were manual dials (yay!) and visibility was excellent. The dual glove boxes were also a nice bonus, very handy. As a bonus, the rear seats could slide fore and aft, either creating more leg room or more cargo room. We did not have the 3rd row option that was available.
One thing I was never thrilled with but figured I could live with (erroneously, as it bothered me the entire time I had it) was the seat fabric. It was a light gray color with a hideous pattern. The upper trim level had much nicer fabric (or leather). I always thought about buying a leather kit, but my wife always said it was a waste on a leased car. I suppose she was right, but the few hundred dollars would have done wonders for the interior, if only in my mind.
The AWD system is an automatic one with a twist. Normally the car is front wheel drive. As soon as it detects slip, it routes some power to the back which then results in good forward progress in snow and icy conditions. However, there is a button on the dash just to the left of the radio that locks the front and back together (electronically, I assume) up to 25mph, at which point it disengages. This is a very useful feature when driving in deep snow or in very heavy weather (but only in slow speed conditions) as it precludes having to wait for front slippage. No matter what any manufacturer says, transferring power between axles is never instantaneous and there is always some lag time.
When we bought it, it was right around the time that Toyota had their “troubles,” and the company introduced a free maintenance program for a 2-year, 25000 mile term for every car. With oil changes spec’d at 5000 mile intervals, this was a nice little perk. I was a little surprised, however, that soon before the first oil change, the AUX input jack for my iPod stopped working. I ignored it until the oil change, then mentioned it and it turned out that they had to order a new jack so I had to return a few days later for a second visit. Not a big deal, but also not something I’d ever heard of failing.
I took my two bigger kids skiing in it a few times and it was great heading up into the Rockies. My daughter rediscovered her susceptibility to nausea so there were a few fraught incidents of trying to get the car to the side of the road in a huge hurry. Of course, once we started carrying a “kit” consisting of a few plastic bags, towels, wipes, and spare clothing, most of that went away. Weird how once you properly prepare, the event never happens.
My daughter and I took a road trip in it the summer of 2011. My mother was a Camp Host at Lake Kintla in Glacier National Park for the season (for you non-campers out there, a Camp Host is to a real Ranger as a Mall Cop is to an LAPD officer – but they do carry Bearspray so don’t mess with them.) We decided that it might be fun to surprise her, so we decided to do a father-daughter trip for a week. Properly provisioned with a tent, sleeping bags, and lots of s’more supplies, we headed north.
I thought this was in the Deep South!
The RAV4 liked to cruise at a steady 80-85mph with no problems, while returning 26 or so mpg as long as the terrain was more or less flat. We headed through Wyoming and into Montana. I was very surprised to see signs for Little Big Horn as I had always assumed that Custer’s Last Stand had taken place in the Deep South.
On the way home, we stopped off there; it is a very interesting place to spend some time and learn its history (beyond what I picked up in 8th grade history class) and see the National Cemetery as well.
On the second afternoon we reached Glacier National Park. My mom had been here before and from what she told me, I recalled that Kintla Lake is the most remote lake, the other side of which is actually Canada. The road in is an unpaved, unmaintained dirt road that, although being only 12 miles long, takes over an hour to get through.
So we found the proper turn off and at first there was just a well graded wide dirt road with good sight lines. Soon enough, I was attempting to drift the little RAV4 through the sweepers until my daughter yelling at me to stop put an end to that. After about 15 minutes the road turns rocky and then there is a general store. After that, the road gets really bad with many mud and potholes, bad ruts, and trees overhanging it, the trail is only one car width for much of its remainder.
It took us over an hour to get through. Not being an off-roader I was quite proud of my accomplishment and the RAV4’s performance. I didn’t see how anyone could have done it in a lesser car. After we got to camp and pulled into an empty campsite I relived the epic adventure in my mind while unpacking the car. I felt like quite the explorer as all the other cars I saw in the camp were comprised of Jeeps, a couple of older Land Rovers and a few large 4×4’s.
The feeling was short lived as ten minutes after we arrived, two ladies showed up driving an older Subaru Impreza. It got worse as five minutes after that, an ’80s-vintage Buick Regal with wire wheel covers and four shirtless young guys arrived while towing a trailer loaded with several canoes. So much for my accomplishment. Later, more regular cars arrived just to rub it in.
Canada is visible in the back of the picture around the bend in the lake. Many of our regular readers are beyond that mountain.
My mom was not there initially but about an hour later, I heard my daughter yell “Grandma!” and there she was, returning from a hike. She was very surprised and delighted to see us. We spent the next couple of days there canoeing, fishing, and constantly looking around nervously for bears.
Somewhere in Montana or Wyoming, this is a huge wind turbine blade in a town near a giant wind farm, this blade got damaged in shipping and was installed in a park. There was no wind the day we were there.
When it was time to go we packed everything up again and drove back out the terrible road and then headed back towards home but spent less time on the interstates and more on the highways in order to see more sights. It was a great trip, with good quality time with my daughter and no issues with the car.
Montana; Dinosaur Center and Rock Shop. Oh, and Bathroom. Not to be missed…
A year and a half after we had gotten the car we were quite settled in our new town. We were moving to another house in the same subdivision, our work (yes, we had started working again!) was going well and we were ready to move on car-wise. So as I had done in California the last time I leased a car, I looked into selling it and realized that as opposed to California, if you sell a leased car, you cannot transfer title directly to the buyer. First for an instant it becomes yours, ALL of the sales tax comes due from you, then the buyer receives title and they pay tax AGAIN. This is ridiculous but there was seemingly no way around it unless I either was or used a licensed dealer.
Since I had a buyer lined up, I approached an acquaintance of mine who was a licensed car broker. He said he would be willing to facilitate the transaction for $500 which I calculated would get me out of the car without losing anything. This was acceptable to me as other local dealers I checked with all wanted more even though I already had the buyer in hand. Greedy bastards. Ultimately, my friend ended up sending me a check for around $1100, which apparently was money returned by Toyota Financial Services as it appears that they will sell a leased car to a dealer for less than they will let you, the owner, pay the lease off for directly. In any case, I was happy with how it turned out.
In the end, the RAV4 was a great car, one I would not hesitate to recommend to anyone, including my mother (and I did but she got a Subaru instead). It looks good, is built well, is durable and economical, with proven materials and excellent resale value. What more could you want?
nice write up Jim! I’ve known several people who have owned RAV4’s in various specs and models and they’ve all loved ’em. I’ve been kicking around the Idea of replacing our Highlander with one when the time comes, as the current generation RAV4 seems to have crept up to almost the same size. I parked next to one at the local Home Depot just yesterday and except for a slightly shorter rear cargo area, they were virtually indistinguishable in size.
Must have been great to take your daughter on such a grand adventure! Mine are currently 7 and 9 and I’m really looking forward to the day that we can do these types of things. Jeeze they grow up fast…..Daughters AND SUV’s!
My daughter was 8 on this trip. We’ve since made the father/daughter trip an annual event. Your kids are plenty old for this type of thing. You’ll be surprised at the conversations you end up having while driving for miles and miles…
Little Jon my in-laws replaced their trusty ’05 Highlander Limited with a new ’13 Rav4 Limited and aside from the better MPG it’s been a huge disappointment quite frankly. Crashy ride, a huge dive in interior material quality. At 5 years old and with 60k miles on the clock, the glovebox handle broke off. I was tinkering with it and it is a the cheapest most cost cut piece of ABS plastic I’ve ever laid eyes on. And the replacement has to be an entire glovebox door assembly, not separate parts like for the generation like Jim’s, which still has a key locking feature (cost cut from ’13+ cars). I honestly can’t recommend the ’13-18 Ravs. What it does have going for it is a lot of interior room for the class, and decent MPG (28 on highway trips). We can also assume the drivetrain will hold up well as it is classic port injection and a regular (non-CVT) automatic. I really hope they improved things from a quality perspective for the ’19s.
Ooooo Jim I cringed when I saw the first picture.
To me, the RAV4 symbolizes all the dull, boring, and conformist qualities of the Camry, but is even worse because its jumped on the crossover bandwagon.
Sure, like the Camry, the RAV4 provides basic transportation. But it lacks the slightest bit of character or style. What’s worse is it tries to be cool and “sporty”.
Far from my cup of tea when it comes to cars, but to each and their own.
Brendan, but you like EVERY car! 🙂 In fairness, I will say that the in-laws have a 2010 Camry which I get stuck driving sometimes when we see them and the RAV beats it in every respect. Easier to get in/out, lots easier to see out of, I think it holds more luggage, and the seating position is more comfortable.
It does not really have much style, true, but if you drive one for a while, a hint of charm comes through. Everybody wants the prom queen, but… 🙂
I fully believe you Jim. As I have said before, I always try to find some good in every car. And to be fair I never have driven one. Part of my negative opinion on this car also comes from the fact that they’re so common. I know that’s not a reason to dislike a car, but my preference for more uncommon/unique no doubt acts as my beer goggles.
I guess one could easily say that about my former Highlander. While at least in my opinion, the 1st gen Highlanders have better, more SUV-like styling, one could certainly argue many of the same negatives as what I put forward about the RAV.
Driving it for over 3 years, I got did find some character in its road mannerisms and it will always hold a special place in my heart 🙂
Brendan I consider the gen 1 Highlanders to be some of the best cars Toyota has built from an overall “goldilocks” perspective of utility/comfort/size/design, they’re also from the last of the “peak” overbuilt Toyotas. They are incredibly durable and long lasting cars, things like the stainless steel exhaust that seems to never ever need work (aside from a flex pipe at high mileage perhaps), the incredibly rust-resistant sheetmetal and subframes, the long lasting suspension components, the interior that wears like iron, etc. Every generation of Highlander since has been downhill in terms of quality as well as exterior design. The ’01-’07s still look fresh today IMO, and I always thought of the gen 1 Mercedes GLK as aping the gen 1 Highlander’s styling.
My big qualm with the ’06-’12 Rav4s was the incredibly short and stiff seat cushions, they seem to be made for shorter people. At 5’11” even a shorter drive feels uncomfortable. The ride on these is pretty stiff-legged as well. But I see this gen as the last of the “real” Rav4s with Toyota’s older (and more effective) AWD system, some real ground clearance and approach/departure angles, and an option to put the spare on the tailgate.
Brendan, I assume you do not have any children. You really can’t do camping trips with two adults, two kids and a dog with a Porsche 911.
No I definitely understand. But hey, you can in a 1993 Plymouth Grand Voyager LE woodie! This would be my choice! It’s hip to be square! 🙂
I’m not really into imports, and like my trucks a little more full-size, so I’ll probably never own a RAV4. But a friend of mine does. Hers is the same year and color as the featured rig, only with a few more options – and she loves it very much.
Her previous vehicle was a ’99 or so RAV4, which apparently got to be a bit of a parts-eater in its old age. But she raves about the new one, and has for the past three years, so it must be being pretty good to her.
She drives the RAV, and her hubby has a Corolla. So, needless to say, I was surprised to discover what “weekend cruiser” lived behind their third garage door: a ’66 Impala coupe… with me in my newly acquired ’69 hardtop at the time. Suddenly we had something vehicular to talk about 🙂
Yes, Brendan, the cars you drive (and have driven) make you such a non-conformist. You’re a rebel! 😉
Good deal on a good car. Buying cars over the internet is really a good way to go. It eliminates a lot of dealer hassle and last minute “surprises” With the DNA of this car being very Camry you know you’ve got good ol’ reliability, but I know I would have gone for that V6 😉
My kids (daughter) have their second CR/V, the first went 180k with very few problems. It was a base trim level. They have a high trim ’11 now, it’s also trouble free, and has a $10 service ‘package’ from the dealer (oil, brakes, rotate).
We traded our ’07 Passat Lux wagon with 124k on an low mileage ’11 VW Tiguan SE. The Rav4 (which I have had as a rental several times) seemed too ‘beige’ to me.
But I think this class is so heavily benchmarked against one another that there really aren’t any losers, and I’m not sure any are outstanding, either.
I have driven that V6 RAV4 and the 4cyl back to back. The salesman was right. The V6 really is too much power to that vehicle and tons of fun. The mpg penalty is immaterial as well (if memory serves, it was only like 3-4 difference). It was very “un toyota like” to have so much engine in a car. An added bonus that you could get the V6 throughout all or most of the model range. It wasn’t limited to just the Limiteds 🙂
Sadly, the current gen RAV4 did away with the V6 (that much easier to talk you up to a Highlander I suppose).
I suspect those V6s will become pretty desirable on the used market in about 5 years.
I’m going to go against the comment grain here and say I was charmed by your story and it had me thinking about picking one of these up used when my Matrix finally bites the dust.
Thanks – it IS similar to the Matrix in many ways, I’d say the cabin is similar size, but a bit easier to get in/out and obviously taller. More tippy too but not really wallowy if that makes sense.
The V6 is apparently a real screamer but still gets better mileage than the CRV with its 4cylinder. I suppose the engine is VERY understressed in this application. If I was looking used I would definitely try both.
Nice car and story but…
“What more could you want?”
Get the darn spare off the tailgate!
These little SUVs are kid haulers, not IH Scouts for the “Scout Racing Team,” so they should have real rear bumpers. If anyone doubts that the Japanese makers can be as cynical as the Big Three, exhibit a is this exploitation of the “it’s a truck” loophole. A decent tap on the kula and that big stiff wheel will crumple the tailgate and shatter the backlight. I believe this was confirmed by testing in the 90s but it took them a long time to do anything about it.
I don’t disagree but did like the extra space created inside by the spare and really liked having the full size spare if needed. It would suck to have to drive on a space saver anywhere but a big city with plenty of tire places. Until we moved out here and now sometimes drive vast distances this did not concern me as much. The luggage space is bigger than expected with lots of underfloor space as well. This also allowed for a third row seat option (which I think would be pretty cramped but have never looked at one myself in person).
I do think the most egregious example of “it’s a truck, not a car” for CAFE purposes would have to go to the PT Cruiser though. It’s a Dodge Neon wagon, for crying out loud!
I used to sneer at the PT Looser and Chevrolet HHR but in retrospect, I guess they were actually pretty clever ways of manipulating the rules. And I actually do see quite a few panel wagon HHRs working for a living!
The only negative I see to the spare on the outside is that you lose a little bit of rearward visibility. If it costs a new tailgate in the extremely unlikely chance that you get rear-ended, then so-be-it. On every Jeep Cherokee I owned I wished that I’d sprung for the tailgate spare mounting kit but never got around to it. That always seemed like the best compromise – put it in the cargo area and you lose out on space/some visibility, put it underneath and it’s a pain in the ass to get to, put it on the roof and it’ll hurt highway gas mileage/make a lot of noise.
They have the spares on the back to maximize cargo space, which actually makes more sense in a family vehicle than just about anything else. Although I also detest the vulnerability and insurance expenses that causes, not to mention the ugly factor, is it really that much worse than most vehicles today?
I’ve been in two low-speed accidents, both were quite expensive to repair even with minimal cosmetic damage. You will shatter the glass and wreck the tailgate easily with that spare tire back there. But I don’t think other CUVs are much if any better, tire or not.
I like the RAV4 too, but I have a couple concerns:
(1) Why in the world is there STILL not a hybrid RAV? There’s a plugin RAV, there’s a hybrid Highlander, but not the RAV. Why?
(2) Three-spoke steering wheels really bug me. I can never find a comfortable position for my hand when cruising. My wife’s Prius is a little better, but still not as good as my 1999 Cutlass.
Because the RAV4 is intended to be a cheap family wagon. Making as few choices as possible makes it cheap. They even dropped the V-6 this year for the same reason.
One could say the same thing about the Camry, and there’s a hybrid Camry.
I’m surprised there is no hybrid minivan, actually. It would seem to make sense, no? Toyota actually has one but it is either Japan only or at least SE Asia only.
I’ve thought the same thing – seems like the perfect platform to stuff lots of batteries underneath, and most minivans are used primarily in low speed, stop-and-go, driving where you get the best results from electric power. Plus it would add some cachet to a body style that hasn’t been seen as trendy in 20 years.
You’d have to lose the fold down seating and under floor storage I’m guessing, which makes a minivan lose much of its appeal.
The volumes on the Camry are a lot higher, and thus the profit margins. If a company as big as Toyota could see money in a Hybrid RAV4, you can be sure they’d do it.
It’s all about the money.
There are many examples of electrics/hybrids that were/are not about the money. EV1, Volt, even the RAV4. Tesla has been doing well so far, and the Prius is probably turning a profit. But I don’t know if any others have. At such low volumes it would seem unlikely.
There is a hybrid RAV4 at least in Europe. Here’s from Toyota Spain website
https://www.toyota.es/coches/rav4/index.json
Well, the Rav4 is awful to drive in my opinion. But I don’t know if we have the same Rav4 as in the US?
But the model over here rides extremely harsh, it has extremely high levels of road noise at 50-60 mph. It’s not spacious, but it’s reliable. At least it’s reliable without the diesel engine or with the old 1,8 VVTI engine who drank oil at an impressive rate.
But it’s a nice story 🙂
I like these cars and their reputation for being bullet proof is pretty accurate too. I’m still hoping to find this bodystyle RAV4 with low miles and the V6/awd combination this year. I don’t think people realize how much of a little rocket the V6 version is. I could just imagine spanking a few of the fart muffler-equipped, winged Hondas around the mall on a Saturday night… after taking the wife by Bed, Bath and Beyond.
You’re a good dad Jim. Enjoy these years. My youngest is almost 14 now so they’re winding down for me. They’re getting too busy for spur of the moment road trips but they still talk about them.
Three years ago when I bought my Acura, I seriously considered this exact car and why not? It’s roomy, has loads of cool features, not too expensive and drives well. It’s cheap to run, well assembled (the Cambridge plant rates as #2 in Toyota’s rankings) and has excellent resale. There is no reason to buy the V-6 as the four is smooth and torquey. Really, it’s an excellent family wagon. The 4 speed auto was a non-issue. The transmission was smooth, didn’t race for hi gear and seemed very durable. I can see why the car is so popular.
In the end, I went with a used car that cost 1/3 of the RAV4.
Once upon a time, the RAV4 could be had with a manual transmission. No longer.
Shame. It might have been worth a look.
Glad to see someone likes the newer model the older versions were popular though gas hungry and had a terrible ride, Originally billed as soft roaders here they were incapable in mud, as by the time the rear axle kicked in you were already bogged now they are only known as road cars I guess they have found their niche and the 2L Corona/ JDM Camry engine has been replaced it seems they have reasonable economy too.
I once drove an early Rav4 and this one must be more civilized by a factor of 10. I have never paid much attention to these – perhaps I should in the future.
Also agree that strippo cars are not what they once were. My Kia Sedona is a total stripper, yet has a V6, 6 speed auto, PW, locks, front/rear air, am/fm/cd/satellite/bluetooth radio and enough other stuff that I forget how basic this car is.
One of my friends has a 2011 RAV4 and although I was highly suspect of it’s boring lameness, I ended up being very impressed with it. It’s a V6/AWD base model and is stupidly fast for this type of vehicle; I was in complete awe the first time I took a ride in it and he put the pedal to the floor! When he got it, I still had a Jeep and he was down to try taking the RAV4 off-roading with me (nothing too crazy, of course – beaches and light trails), but we never got around to it. Not long afterwards, he ended up getting a job in California and liked the RAV4 so much that he had it shipped across the country! I still wish I had gotten a chance to see what it could do on unpaved surfaces. Does that “4WD Lock” button stay engaged permanently as long as you stay under 25MPH? That’s a great feature that I wish all vehicles like this had.
Clearly whatever this RAV4 lacked in style or excitement it made up for in creating great memories. Reading this reminded me of going on road trips to Pennsylvania when I was little to visit my “Uncle” (godfather) Lou. Looks like your daughter is a much more competent angler than I was at that age (great picture!); the first time my dad took me fishing on one of those trips I fell in a creek and lost a shoe!!
Yes it stays locked until you either hit 25mph or hit the button again. Or turn the engine off. Nice feature.
We did not catch any fish. But had very impressive neon pink bait with glitter in it – 8year-olds like everything to be “bedazzled” including their bait. I’ve never seen her stand still for so long without anything occurring!
“Not what comes to mind when I think base”
I recently had a similar experience, replacing a 1999 base Jeep Cherokee (technically a “Cherokee SE”, but “SE” badging appears nowhere on the vehicle) we had owned since it was new with a 2014 base Ford Escape (technically an “Escape S”, but “S” badging appears nowhere on the vehicle). The Cherokee had crank windows, manual door locks, a simple AM/FM stereo with no music player of any kind (it had seek but no scan), all analog gauges (the odometer was digital) and conventional brakes (with drums on the rear). The Escape has a backup camera, digital screens all over the place, AM/FM with CD & SYNC, ABS and traction control.
The two biggest adjustments I’ve had to make are using the backup camera when I’m in reverse — it took me a little while to learn to trust it, but rear visibility is so poor compared to the Cherokee that you really need to use the screen — and learning to operate the radio. The radio in the Escape is unlike any car radio I’ve ever owned. I’m used to flipping around the tuning knob, but the Escape’s radio doesn’t have one.
A few ways in which they are alike: both have non-tinted windows; neither has alloys (the Cherokee had silver steel wheels with center caps, the Escape has black steels with wheel covers); and both have noticeably lower-spec outside trim (the grille, bumpers, trim and door handles on the Cherokee were all black, and it lacked the rub strip between the fender wells found on on higher-spec Cherokees; the Escape has black door handles, an all-black grille, and the lower body cladding on the rear is a solid dark grey).
There is, also, one RAV4 that I’d really like to own (or two if you count the current model):
Ah yes, the EV. I used to see a few of the originals still running around when we lived in CA. There are supposedly still over 500 in existence. I have not yet seen one of the new ones that I believe came out in 2012.
Interesting aside – I believe the RAV4 was really the first CUV. It first came out in 1994, a year ahead of the CRV. S-10 Blazers, Cherokee’s etc I’d consider much more of an SUV back in that timeframe.
I haven’t either, but apparently Toyota still only sells the RAV4 EV in California. I always assumed it was available nationwide for some reason, or at least in a few other markets.
In the early days of the CUV (before they were even called that) the lines were kind of blurred, although S-10 Blazers and Cherokees are certainly a totally different animal altogether. What about the 4-door Suzuki Sidekick/Geo Tracker, though? I believe those were really the vehicles that the RAV4 and CR-V were developed as a response to, and despite being of traditional body-on-frame construction (really just a less painful Samurai), they were very similar to the first generation Toyotas and Hondas in function and purpose. The RAV4 was definitely the first legitimate, car-based, take on that style… that I know of, anyway.
Over the summer I saw a red 1995 RAV4 2-door convertible parked next a red 1995 Samurai 2-door convertible – wish I could have gotten a picture of them together, but it was one of the few times I didn’t have my phone on me. I did get a shot of this snow-capped first year CR-V recently, though. Remember when all vehicles like this were plastered with silly ass decals? We’ve come a long way!
I forgot about those but since they were BOF rear wheel drive based I’ll lump them in with the S-10 Blazer etc. (In my mind, yours may vary!). I’d think the driving experience is much more Jeep-like than the original RAV and CRV. The Isuzu Rodeo and Amigo kind of fall in this camp as well now that I think about it.
It seems one of the less then 400 sold to customers outright(i.e. no silly ass lease where you had to give it back) made it Maryland at some point along with its owner who works in the same building I work in. It is still going with the original battery pack. I have better pics on my camera which I mean to use as a write up someday, but all I have with me is a pic from a crappy camera phone.
A RAV4 EV is an impressive find even in California, but on the East Coast? Incredible! Before the current crop of EVs hit the market, the resale value on the handful of electrics that were sold to private owners in the late 90s/early 00s was crazy, and it actually hasn’t fallen all that much. I was looking at ads on Autotrader not too long ago and saw a Ranger EV listed for almost $20k ! So somebody paid a pretty penny for that RAV and then quite a bit more to have it shipped across the country (unless he or she took the world’s slowest road trip). Can’t say I blame them – I’d do the same thing if I had the dough.
Well It did take a road trip to get to Maryland but on a trailer on the back of a Uhaul so it got no road time itself. This seems to be an all weather driving vehicle as it was there today all caked with rock salt.
Not even if it was free…..but still a nice story.
Thanks Carmine, funnily enough as I’ve written these over the last few months I have repeatedly had the thought that there has not been much in my inventory that would have interested you 🙂 Glad you enjoyed the story, anyway.
I love the RAV4! I had a 2004 model, which I traded in on a “left over” 2012 last January. I got a great deal on the financing. My 2004 had 160,000 miles on it. I also bought it brand new. The 2004 only needed the basics throughout the years — brakes, tires. It never had any mechanical problems whatsoever.
I love the spaciousness of the 2012. It’s a little bit larger than the 2004. I have the base model, too, and quite frankly, I think the base model has everything I need.
I have a round trip commute of 42 miles daily. I have found that this car is most comfortable, and good on city streets as well as on the highway. The gas mileage is okay.
Another selling point for the RAV4 was my son. While I am only 5’10”, my 15 year old son is 6’1″ (and still growing!). He seems to have enough leg room in the front and back of the RAV4. When I went to buy the RAV, I actually made him sit in the car to make sure he would be comfortable. My father-in-law is 6’2″, so comfort of the passengers is most important.
About a year ago, my mom needed a car. Her Kia Sportage had seen better days. Much better days. I convinced her to buy a 2006 RAV4. One of the main selling points for my mom was the back door. My father is in a wheelchair, and the back door opening in the fashion in which it does seems to make getting the wheelchair in and out of the car much easier for her. Also, the wheelchair seems to fit nicely in the back. It did not fit nicely in the back of the Kia Sportage.
I agree with the statement about CUV’s. The CUV is the station wagon of today. They are family haulers. They are the cars to which we turn for family errands. My wife has a Chevrolet Equinox. That’s another family hauler. People buy cars for practical reasons.
Would it be nice to drive around in a sporty little car? Sure. Is it practical right now? No. However, I do enjoy driving the RAV4.
Nice story!
Sounds like very good family cars for you; reliable, roomy and reasonably cheap to operate. That’s kind of why Toyota’s are so popular, come to think of it.
Nice, my brother had a 2004 RAV4, like the one on the picture below. It had the 2.0 liter D4D engine. D4D is Toyota-language for a common rail injected turbo diesel engine with an intercooler. The air inlet in the hood is for the intercooler. Transmission was a 5 speed manual.
Nothing wrong with the handling, for such a car it had a pretty stiff suspension.
The 2.0 liter diesel engine was just a perfect match for this car, given its size and weight.
Great story; Glacier NP is on my bucket list for certain.
Never been in a RAV4 but the older ones have appeal. What’s with the side-hinging rear door, though? That would really annoy me, especially unloading music gear at a gig. I’d much rather have an upswinging door.
“I don’t know why everyone is always going on about how horrible a 4-speed transmission is.”
Jim- I used to agree with this statement, but then I drove a Honda Element out of our office pool with the 5 speed automatic. I had previously driven an older Element with the four speed automatic, and the 5 speed really improved the driving dynamics.
To be fair, the Element has lousy sound deadening, so the change may have been more pronounced than in other cars, but the five speed really changed the character of the car, particularly for in town driving. Much more relaxed and far less buzzy.
I struggled a bit with the wording when I wrote that and I don’t disagree with you. I suppose I meant that THIS 4-speed works just fine in THIS car and is very unobtrusive without making one see a need for one with more ratios.
You also had the benefit of 2.5 liters. With smaller 1.5- and 1.6-liter (normally aspirated) engines, a four-speed might seem adequate if you mostly drive on level freeways and surface streets, but get into the mountains and you suddenly realize (a) you don’t have nearly enough gears and (b) whichever one you’re in at any given moment is probably wrong.
Conversely, my issue with 6+ speed transmissions is that they are always shifting when they shouldn’t need to and never seem to be in the right gear because the power band is so narrow. It can make moderate driving feel aggressive, which I don’t really like when I have passengers on board.
Our differring opinions probably depend on each gear ratio and the intelligence of the system I suppose. I drove a 4 speed Civic across the Rockies with no issues, while a 6 speed Explorer around Salt Lake City was constantly shifting in the mountains. Really soured me on 6+ speed transmissions, and the newer Chrysler vans aren’t any better IMO.
The 6 speed in my Kia Sedona (2012) shifts quite unobtrusively. I have not noticed any gear hunting, and beyond second or third, rarely have any idea what gear it is in. It is one of the most pleasant automatics I have lived with in a modern vehicle.
But the question becomes is that van better with 6 speeds than it would be with 4 or 5, which would save costs? I would think it’s powerful enough that it shouldn’t really need 6.
The next F-150 is rumored to have a 10-speed automatic. That seems completely pointless in a truck line where the smallest engine puts out 300 HP and 280 ft/lbs of torque. Who knows, maybe they’ll prove me wrong.
Nice road trip tale, but I have to ask, if it’s not too impertinent– what makes a four-year-old, mass market SUV a “Classic”? I visit here to see half-forgotten oddities; I see RAV4s everywhere else I go.
Maybe CC needs to declare a 20-year rule? With worthy exceptions, of course.
COALs are not automatically CCs. EVERY car tells a story, as the man said.
It’s a “Cars Of A Lifetime” article, as part of a series, so there is no restriction. If you skipped everything that is newer, there’d be large gaps. I personally find it interesting to see the progression of vehicles over someone’s lifetime, sometimes the person has newer cars, sometimes older, sometimes it skips around…
By the way, it’s even worse than you feared, it’s only THREE years old! 🙂 I picked it up January 3, 2011.
The ‘C’ in COAL stands for cars (of a lifetime), not classics. The Rav isn’t a classic in my eyes either (my sister previously had a gen1, it was fine but talk about flimsy construction!), but it needs to be here as the latest in Jim’s lengthy timeline of vehicles. To miss a vehicle out of the timeline would be like leaving a chapter out of a book. I’ve really enjoyed ready Jim’s series of articles and seeing how his vehicular needs and wants have changed as his life progresses – it’s a process that happens to us all, no matter how much we love the classics 🙂
EDIT: In the time it took me to write this and have lunch, I see Jim’s replied along the same lines – great minds thinking alike perhaps lol!
I see your point, as I skipped the COAL designation on first reading. So no harm, no foul. But you never really know a car until you’ve run it out of warranty.
My aunt got a slightly used loaded v6 AWD a few years ago when she got rid of her former car. It’s not her favorite car she’s ever had, but it’s been reliable for her.
It’s amazing how quickly this segment has evolved. It’s gone from cute ute to sedan killer overnight. Despite the nice looks of many and practicality of all I would not have considered one until I drove the CX5 and Escape 2.0. Models like these, the Evoque and Juke have given the small sport sedan buyer a place to go. The more mainstream CUVs are hurting mid-sedans. BMW could have really cleaned up if the 1-series wasn’t so ugly. I bet the GLA and Infiniti GLA do well.
The problem with these cute-utes, coming from a sports sedan, is that they make you feel like you’re driving 10 mph slower all the time. Imagine recalibrating your BMW’s speedo into Km. So that’s 60… really? No two different classes of car could be more alike than my wife’s Tiguan and my GTI. My young daughter panicked when I took her home, onto the freeway, after buying the GTI. “Daddy! How fast are you going?!?” “Uh… about 57.”
But it did feel so much faster because we sat a foot closer to the road. It’s part of the reason go-karts feel so fast.
Once you climb up to the mezzanine level of vehicles, bad things happen to the handling. The ride, too, gets worse, because any tilts in the road create a larger movement at head level. The sports suspension in my GTI is a wonderful balance of stiffness and smoothness. The Tiguan, with similar SEL-trim sports suspension, is punishing on bad pavement. I made my poor daughter whimper again as I drover her home, slowly, in the Tiguan, just as the novocain was wearing off from her wisdom teeth extraction. Ouch!
This is exactly the reason I don’t drive any SUV/CUV. I find they simply don’t ride and handle as well as cars, for the same reasons you state above. I feel like my head is snapped from side to side all the time. I realise SUV/SUV’s in fact drive very well, they are just not my thing.
Flipside, why do you want to feel like you’re going faster then you really are? My daily drivers have been SUV/CUVs and pick-ups for many years, I prefer them for a whole laundry list of reasons, but when I drive a standard car , for the first few minutes I have the sensation that I’m in a hole looking up and my butt is about two inches off the ground, I don’t like that feeling. I guess It’s all what you’re used to
That’s a fair question. And interesting, because I’m really not a speed demon. My only recent speeding ticket was for a mighty 42 mph, in Boulder, CO, where these things happen.
I guess I want my cars to make a dull drive more exciting. I’d like to feel fast, whether or not I really am. I guess that makes me an “enthusiast,” still. The Tiguan makes me feel slow, even when I’m keeping the pace.
Another flip side is the seating position. I get awfully uncomfortable on road trips with my feet at almost the same level as my butt, as was the case with many sporty cars I have owned in the past.
There are exceptions, my 4Runner’s seats were very low to the floor despite the vehicle height.
I know what you mean. But as a long-waisted person, I’m slamming my seat to gain precious headroom, and to get a glimpse of the sky. Seats move up and down, but in the Tiguan, they never go down far enough.
As the category has grown to replace sedans we are seeing more fragmented offerings. They are no longer all the same, like a RAV, CRV or Rogue. Now there are sporty off-shoots, like we saw with sport sedans in the 80s.
You don’t give up much fun to drive when you choose a CX5 over a Mazda 6. For someone replacing a current sedan the new CX5 will handle better, even if there is a bit more head toss than in a new 6.
As for the six speed transmissions that hunt for the right gear that’s never a problem in the 2.0L Escape Ecoboost. The power band is broad and deep. It has quicker steering than just about any sedan at 2.8 turns lock to lock. While the CX5 handles more like a traditional sport sedan you work harder to hustle one down the road than you do an Escape 2.0.
Both give you more confidence to drive fast over bad pavement which covers just about every street in LA. That same drive in a GTI would be torture. If a Tiguan rides like a GTI maybe it’s time to check out an Escape.
The fun to drive gap versus a car will shrink further when new products like the GLA hit the market.
Nice write up, but there’s one thing I don’t agree with, and that’s the statement that the RAV4 doesn’t try to be something it’s not. Almost all CUVs are pretending to be something they are not. If they weren’t, they’d be cars or minivans.
It is a decent combination of economy and utility for a family of four though.
“It is a decent combination of economy and utility for a family of four though.”
I think that’s exactly what the RAV4 and others in this segment are trying to be. I don’t see where they claim to be rock crawlers or have the ability forge mighty rivers. They do offer versatility and AWD that a lot of mid-size sedans don’t. They also offer in most cases better visibility, an increasingly rare commodity in cars. What I don’t understand is the dismissive disdain they generate. If you don’t like them, don’t buy them, but don’t criticize those who do, they have no idea what you drive and really don’t care, because that’s your choice
I do have a disdain for CUVs because they have decimated the mid-size SUV and minivan markets with higher-cost, less functional choices. But I will concede that in today’s market, they do have an appeal. Not because I think they are great, but because other family choices are so limited.
No need to get offended, it’s not like anybody is proclaiming it a Deadly Sin and going on and on about how overtly stupid somebody would have to be to like it 😉
I’m not offended at all, I’m just trying to understand why these harmless little wagons stir such emotion in some people.
“I do have a disdain for CUVs because they have decimated the mid-size SUV and minivan markets ”
I don’t understand this, the buying public said, “I like the utility and versatility of an SUV, but they’re too big, too thirsty and too expensive. I also don’t want to be seen in, or associated with the middle class, mundane mommy car mini-van ”
So for once the auto industry listened and came up with the CUV and the people bought every one the auto industry could make because it was exactly what they wanted and there was joy through out the land… Except for those who didn’t want them. They groaned and moaned about the horrible CUV that everyone loved and were happy to drive and mumbled under their breath, “When will they make a car just for me?”
*sigh*
Why do you show disdain for minivans by calling them a “mundane mommy-car”? Unlike CUVs they have never pretended to be anything other than what they are and today they offer performance and utility that is nothing to sneer at. That kind of attitude is what feeds the disdain for CUV owners, essentially throwing rocks while living in a glass house.
Most CUVs do NOT have the utility and versatility of a true SUV. They have the IMAGE of utility and versatility, with little and often no more capability and space than the cars they are based off of. Today’s CUVs get great mileage compared to trucks…but they are not trucks, they are cars designed to look like trucks. When compared to cars of similar cargo volume they are not so impressive.
Most cars stir emotions in people for a variety of reasons. Corollas stir emotion here because they are as dull as a dishwasher. Hummers stirred emotion because of their gas-guzzling image. Even the GM B-bodies and Ford Panthers stir much emotion on these pages. I already stated why CUVs stir my emotions. Am I being 100% objective? Of course not. That’s why we come to CC. If you have no emotional reaction to cars, you’re in the wrong place.
I didn’t say that, I was quoting the many mommies that turned their collective backs on the mini-van causing sales to plummet because they thought them to be mundane and wouldn’t be caught dead driving one.
I personally think they’re great, especially the ’91 Aerostar that I had once. The only cars that stir my emotions are mine or ones that I want. I’m pretty indifferent to what other people drive.
The high driving position is about the only thing I dislike about CUVs. I see your point about visibility and utility completely. Over the past decade, I’ve watched cars get too low for comfort and roadability. I actually raised my last VW an inch so I’d stop crunching speed bumps. If my Tiguan was paid for, not leased, and used as my personal car, I’d want to lower it an inch and install GTI seats– that would be perfect!
What’s missing among the seemingly vast vehicle choices today are vehicles that would fit in the middle between high-riding S/CUVs and chopped-down cars. Something like an original Forester, but even Subaru doesn’t do that anymore.
Hard to argue with practical and competent.
That’s Toyota’s blessing and curse in seven words or less.
These are nice, reliable vehicles but I think Honda has the edge in interior/seat quality. A good friend of mine has a 2010 RAV-4 with possibly the worst seats I have ever sat in. If I ride in that vehicle for more than 15 minutes my back is killing me. Absolutely no support at all! Plus the dash and door panels look very cheap, IMO. I have an older CR-V and I think my interior looks better and the seats are far more comfortable. The RAV has an edge on a little more cushioned/comfortable ride, but other than that I’ll take my Honda any day.
Seats tend to be subjective. The most comfortable seats of any vehicle I’ve ever had were in a 1998 Explorer. Yet some people here said they found them to be terrible. And often with time your body tends to adapt and you get used to it to the point it doesn’t bother you. I’ve found that in my Grand Caravan and also when I get new office chairs at work.
What I really liked about the older CR-Vs was the fold-down center console. I don’t know if they still offer that or not, but it gave it the functionality of a mini-minivan.
The most comfortable seats I ever had were the Multi-Contour ones in a 2011 X5.
The least comfortable…a 1997 Jetta GLX VR6.
My best friend was handed down a 2007 4cyl base model from his mom who bought it new in 2006 after she bought a new 2014 RAV4 XLE. Between the two the build quality is much better in the 14′ and has more features, however the 07’s steering feels much better and that optional v6 in the sport edition was always tempting to me, currently the 07′ has over 160k on it with no major issues but a LOT of recalls since they’ve owned it. For a smaller SUV it has a good amount of features for the money and I understand why it’s so popular here
My grandpa, now in his late 70s, has been owning one of those since around 2010, maybe a bit earlier, and a couple years ago he started insisting that it’s the last car he’s ever bought. It’s spot-on reliable, he’s utterly happy with it and he says he’s even getting compliments for it in parking lots because it’s looking so trim and neat compared to bloated, edgy modern crossovers.
Are those steel wheels? If so, they look great. I know the ones on the same-era CR-V were steel, and they looked good, too.
I like this RAV4 a lot. I don’t like the current one much at all, but the new ’19 is nice, especially the Hybrid and its exclusive front fascia.
Yup, steel and they still look good to me after all these years. Actually, the steelies are my favorite of all of the wheels in this generation RAV4. And I agree about the CRV’s looking good too. I try to like the current one but…but yeah, the upcoming new one looks a lot more interesting.
My little tiny 2 cents- those damn AUX jacks (likely 3 conductor 1/8 inch phone jacks) are just stupidly fragile, in every device everywhere, and I am not surprised it broke. That happened to my little flash player thus rendering it useless. I think newer units have Bluetooth or even WiFi inputs to banish the dreaded AUX jack.
I have a 2010 Base Rav with the V6. Bought it CPO with 8k on it about 8 months old. Wife had her heart set on heated leather, so for 1500 bucks the dealer had a Katzkin(sp?)leather interior installed on all 3 rows, heated fronts. Still in perfect shape and keeps the wife’s buns toasty!
Absolutely love the V6, it’s quite fast and gets about the same mileage as the 4cyl. All in all, a great vehicle. It recently got demoted to 2nd class, 1st class is now a new Lexus RX350. Same basic engine I’m told.
My friend just picked up an orange 2016 LE complete with plastic hub caps and little in the way of frills. He wanted something inexpensive with 4X4 that could haul appliances and act as a mobile office.
After spending an hour driving it I just didn’t understand the appeal of these. For starters the amount of tire noise that filters into the cabin is borderline obnoxious. One could blame the factory tires but with only 13K miles they shouldn’t be this noisy. The driver’s seat wasn’t very comfortable and without saying a word to another friend that sat in back listened to him complain that the seat was lumpy and not at all comfortable on his bottom.
It also lacks certain features that I take for granted on today’s cars. I mean to not have automatic headlights on a vehicle this new and costly brand new is surprising. Heck my 1996 Chevy’s had them. USB ports are few and far between. No XM radio. The interior is also loaded with lots of cheap hard black plastic and my arm kept shuffling between the hard armrest in the door and the door sill and back off again during the drive and there was just something off with the driving position and I couldn’t really get comfortable in it. Several interior pieces have already come loose in fact starting with an ill fitting passenger side A pillar molding that doesn’t want to stay snapped into place and a glovebox rattle that we haven’t yet figured out.
The 2.5 is adequate but it’s interesting to note how much noisier it is when first started and when floored compared to my 2017 Impala’s 2.5 Ecotec. He has had to bring it back to the dealer for an alignment issue and warped front brakes that started warbling after descending a long hill which apparently wiped out the front rotors.
I’m very curious how the new 2019 RAV 4 will fare to this one. It sure looks a lot nicer and has the more powerful 2.5 so that might help some. The interior also looks to be of better quality. But for now I don’t highly recommend the current model.