In August of 2016, Toyota’s RAV4 CUV outsold its long best-selling Camry sedan for the first time ever. For that matter, so did the Honda CRV and the Nissan Rogue. CUVs have become the best selling passenger cars. Who would have predicted that in 1994, when Toyota launched the very first CUV (1996 in the US)? And although the longer four door version was always the best seller, it’s easy to forget that the RAV4 was also available in a short version, both as hardtop and as soft top.
The origins of the term CUV (“crossover utility vehicle”) are a bit vague. According to one source, it was used to describe the market segment of some AMC/Jeep vehicles (Eagle, SX/4) as a rationale for Chrysler’s acquisition of AMC in 1987. But those were sedans/wagon bodies converted to all-wheel drive. In the generally accepted definition, a CUV is a multipurpose vehicle based on sedan underpinnings, but with its own completely unique body, inherently taller than its sedan donor. And in terms of kicking off the modern CUV explosion, the 1996 Toyota RAV4 gets the honors.
The RAV4, in both short and long-wheelbase form, was originally only sold in Japan, starting in 1994. US sales began in 1996. It sat on a modified Corolla platform, and was powered by the 2.0 L 3S-FE 16-valve four used in a variety of mid-sized Toyotas. In the original RAV4 version, it was rated at 120 hp. A minor facelift in 1998 brought a 127 hp version. Auto parts for the Toyota RAV4 model are still available online, so no need to worry about replacement parts.
1998 also saw the introduction of the soft-top version of the two-door, to compete more directly against the Suzuki Sidekick/Geo Tracker, which were not CUVs, as they were designed as 4x4s from the ground up.
Needless to say, the two-doors were very short indeed, sitting on an 86.6″ (2200mm) wheelbase. And how huge are CUVs like the Buick Enclave? From tiny RAV4s do mighty CUVs grow…
Totally forgot that the 2-door RAVs existed – so cool, especially the soft top – cool write-up Paul! I find it amazing how popular the CUV has become. I doubt sedans will go away forever, but the CUV has certainly changed what we drive, for sure here in the States.
So where does the Mitsubishi Expo LRV (3-door) and larger 4-door Expo fit into this? The LRV (RVR in Canada and elsewhere) appeared about a year before the RAV4 if I recall correctly and catered to the same audience. Also sold under many other guises and thus little remembered today. But I think Mitsubishi got here first.
They were closer to MPVs. Even though they had available AWD, they never looked like SUVs, which is another important factor when classifying CUVs.
Mini-minivan? The 4door was similar to the eventual first-gen Honda Odyssey and the smaller one with the slider was a lot like the Nissan Axxess etc. I liked these a lot but CUV’s they aren’t.
I’d call them a small MPV or even a tall wagon. The smaller LRV was in many respects a spiritual successor to the 4×4 Civic wagons, though with a single slider rather than 2 standard back doors. (Looking at that photo, that slider must have extended well past the end of the car when open…!)
Indeed since I can see the practicality of one of these over a sedan though I rather call them SUVs. RAV4s are all over this part of Oregon from beaters to cream puffs and some have quirky graphics on them, but I have always wondered how the two door RAV4s rode since they have a short wheelbase. Also wonder how fun the manual in these was. How do you think the Black RAV4 got those interesting dents?
Ooohhh!! What about EV RAV4s!? I have seen one or two around here in 3 years, they are interesting.
I appreriate the pioneering work of the RAV4. But it was the Ford Escape and its sisters models that put CUV’s into the mainstream.
The original concept was preliminary work done by Mazda based on a 626 platform. Ford took (stole) the ball and developed the Escape; Mazda got the Tribute, and Mercury eventually got the Mariner. The big selling point was that these vehicles could be had with a V6 while most CUV’s were limited to 4cylinders.
I was lucky to have a ’05 Escape which I eventually put 200K miles on it with minimal issues. Would like to see a COAL on this platform.
On the west coast at least, the RAV4 and the Honda CR-V were well established way before Ford finally showed up with the Escape, by which time Toyota was already on the second generation RAV4. And Lexus had the luxury CUV market covered with the original RX300 since late 1998.
The Toyota and Honda seemed to do just fine with their 4 cylinders, eventually RAV got a V6 but it was hardly necessary in such a small and light platform. On the west coast the whole point was to be a bit more efficient (frugal) with relatively high gas prices, leaving the V6 an unnecessary option.
Can I assume you don’t live on the West Coast, or the higher density portions of the East Coast? because by the time the Escape came along, CUVs, like the RAV4 and CRV, were very well established. And the Escape never sold as well as them in California, and I suspect some other key markets.
The Escape undoubtedly made CUVs “ok” with the more domestic leaning parts of the country, lie the Midwest.
I had just moved to the Hudson Valley when I bought my Escape. I saw just as many Escapes/Tributes/Mariners as RAV4’s and CRV’s on the Long Island Expressway and New York Thruway. Also saw plenty in Philly and DC as well as trips home to NOLA. And NYC adopted them as part of its taxi fleet.
Ford must of gotten something right!!
You are partially correct it was the Escape and CR-V that made the segment mainstream. RAV-4 sales really weren’t that good at the beginning.
Per goodcarbadcar.net
sales 2002
RAV-4 87K
CR-V 146K
Escape 145K
According to Wiki, RAV4 sales more than doubled with the 2006 redesign! Still, the CR-V has outsold it every year since 1998.
Another fun fact from Wiki: the 2001-2005 RAV4 probably had the highest percentage of female drivers outside of the VW New Beetle.
Anecdotally speaking, the CR-V and Escape never suffered from the “cute” stigma that the pre-2006 RAV4 had.
2002 wasn’t the beginning. Escape began in 2000, CRV in 1997.
I’d say the Rav4 paved the way for the others that were able to build on its strengths and improve its weaknesses. Rav4 already had five years of US sales before the Escape appeared and about a year and a half before the CRV in the US.
The first gen Rav4 sold about 300,000 times from 1996-2000. Escape sold 42000 times in 2000 (intro year) but did muchbetter in full year 2001 (164k). CRV sold 406,000 (!) from 1997-2000 with only one body style and one engine and followed up with 118k in 2001 and then went up in 2002 while Escape fell. Honda didn’t even bother with a 2-door, obviously saw the writing on the wall. (Source Left-Lane.com, I wonder why GCBC doesn’t have the older figures before ’02?)
There have been a few years since the Escape was introduced where it sold more than the CRV, assuming we are counting fleet sales (it’s still a sale I suppose, I wish we could see the rental fleet percentage, I’d guess that in private sales the CRV was higher). But the Rav4 and the CRV did the heavy lifting in the beginning for sure. I wonder where Ford would have been if Mazda hadn’t started the development….probably trying to push people into Explorer Sports or Rangers.
I never said 2002 was the beginning just those were the oldest numbers that I knew where to quickly find.
The RAV-4 was a niche vehicle until 2006 while the CR-V and Escape came out of the gate strong and stayed there.
Mazda developed the concept that became the Escape and Tribute because that is what Ford wanted them to do. In 1994 Ford sent Henry Wallace to oversee the restructuring of the hemorrhaging Mazda and eventually name him President of Mazda. So Ford can rightfully take credit for the Escape as it wouldn’t have got past the idea stage w/o approval from those that answered to Dearborn.
So yes the RAV-4 was the original cute utility vehicle but it didn’t really take off in the US until the 3rd generation.
The First Gen RAV4 was an appealing vehicle, still small enough where its FWD based driveline wasn’t too much of an impediment to taking it off the beaten path. Also had a more truck-like boxy look, opposed to the jellybean shape most CUVs have taken on.
Those small 2-door SUVs have virtually disappeared, haven’t they? The only one I can think of now that still exists in my part of the world is a variant of the Suzuki Grand Vitara, and of course, the 4-door version outsells that by miles.
Strangely, the 2-door and soft top are what I remember of the first generation RAV4, the 4 doors are what I completely forgot existed, and they were extremely uncommon around here when new. Up until now if I’d be saying the second generation ushered in the 4 door, shaking away the sidekick/tracker mimicking roots.
I did like these, they still carried a lot of that rugged look real SUVs were known for in the 80s – real colors, stickers, fat tires, high ground clearance, tailgate mounted external spare, weather resistant interiors, fender flares, manually removed canvas tops, pop-up sunroofs or targa roofs – CUVs got way too soft after this, succumbing to beige and silver exteriors, grey interiors, ground clearance barely any taller than the sedan they’re based. Modern CUVs remind me of old Victorian era buildings, that due to numerous renovations over a century have been rendered utterly unreconizable except for a few tell tale shapes that couldn’t be plastered over easily. Seeing one of these early 2 door RAV4s is like finding an old photo of that same building you were looking at and exclaiming “Oh, that’s how it should look! Now it makes sense!”
Well said. That red soft-top reminded me that these originally had a ton of sex appeal to younger women. Of course, a lot of those same women are now driving RAV4s, except they are mom-mobiles.
Why is it that models start out small in size and relatively inexpensive and after they become popular they get larger and larger?
Simple. It becomes the ‘in thing’, and everyone wants a piece. ‘Real’ sports utilities are limited to 2 Jeeps and a Toyota here stateside. The reason being is that every yuppie and soccer mom wanted the outdoorsy image and look of an SUV….yet very few were actually up to task when it came to using them as intended and accepting the fact that these rough and tumble rigs have some shortcomings if youre going to use them as suburban kid haulers.
Now what you have is something that’s less adept than a minivan yet still better than a sedan at family duties yet nowhere near up to task as a truck that can do a few car things. Theres good reason why Jeep is selling a ton of Wranglers right now, and classic old school sports utilities like the K5 Blazer, Bronco, Ramcharger, FJ-40 Landcruiser and old Jeep CJs are fetching ridiculous prices for clean specimens.
I would posit based on the Jeep Wrangler owners I know that off roaders buy used wranglers and customize them. New wranglers, on the other hand, appear to be the purview, almost exclusively, of posers who will never go off road, but just want the look.
That’s the impression I’ve gotten since they extended the wheelbase and added two extra doors.
Bloat and mission creep isn’t exclusive to this segment of course. I think the average new car buyer’s age answers more than a few of those questions.
I have two neighbors with Wranglers.
#1 bought a used Wrangler Rubicon Unlimited – the 2door extended wheelbase one that they made for a couple of years, with about 75k miles on it for about $11k IIRC. Over the last two years he’s transformed it into something resembling Lara Croft’s Tomb Raider vehicle, however he regularly straps the wife and two kids into it and they go to Moab for the week or other off-roading areas with bikes and tents etc. (On rainy days he drives a Prius, it’s kind of funny but he’s practical.). Super outdoorsy people, I’m actually impressed with how much use he gets out of it even though it’s their third car.
#2, after living next to #1 for the last two years, now bought a top of the line brand new 4-door Wrangler Rubicon as his main car and spent the first two weeks replacing wheels, tires, bumpers, suspension, adding a winch, and a different top to it. Now it’s a bro-Jeep and he’s into it for probably close to $55-60k. He, his wife, and their two kids joined neighbor #1 for a week at Moab this summer. It apparently didn’t go well and they came back early and the wife wants nothing to do with camping or Jeeping anymore. He claims to love the thing but I have to wonder. The winch is very shiny and I doubt has ever been used. The Jeep looks very nice though.
Neither scenario is “wrong”, people should get and buy what they like. I just don’t really understand it…Jeep’s are kind of like Harley’s I guess. I wouldn’t mind having either but realize I am not the core demographic and would probably mainly drive it to Starbucks..but would be comfortable with that. 🙂
My sister is awaiting delivery of a 2017 Wrangler Unlimited Rubicon, ditching an unloved Subaru Outback. It has the size she needs for cargo, is 4 wheel drive for dealing with snow and most importanly is a manual transmission (something she missed dreadfully in her Outback). The HD Rubicon version was the choice because long term, her husband can eventually put it to work on the farm when she is done using it for general duty.
Your sister is getting the twin of neighbor #2, his is a manual as well. Black on black 4door Rubicon with leather and I think most options. He says it’s great. It will be very different from an Outback!
Twin indeed, because hers is black in and out as well. A Rubicon with heated leather seats just seems wrong to me, but then maybe I’m strange. Don’t answer that. 🙂
Haha, I’d send you the soft top I have laying around here that I swear is for a Wrangler but is probably actually for a Daihatsu Rocky. It’ll fit just fine… 🙂
HaHaHa, glad I had already finished my coffee before reading this, or I would be wiping the monitor about now. 🙂
Interestingly enough, the Honda CR-V has gotten only an inch and a half wider in its 20 years of sales, and has stayed the same in other dimensions, or even decreased (the newest CR-V is slightly lower than previous models).
Comparing the first and second generations of RAV4 to later models, and it almost seems like those would be better classified subcompact CUVs, with a sub-100″ wheelbase even on the 4-door models.
I remember when these came out. As a long time Jeep fan, I wrote off the Suzukis, Daihatsus, Geos, etc as wannabes. Basically blown up versions of the power wheels Barbie Jeeps for 16 year olds. Little did I know that compared to what would come down the pipe later on, those were actually credible 4x4s. These first Rav4s aped the look of the Geo Trackers but with corolla underpinnings, they weren’t going too far off the pavement. While CUVs have supplanted sedans and minivans as family vehicles for mom and pop, these first gen Rav’s are starting to look pretty desireable…especially the ragtops. I can see a manual awd version being a fun little toy to flog around some gravel roads or deal with winter snow/ice. Sure, its no Jeep but it doesn’t have to be hardcore to be worth some laughs.
When these came out I couldn’t understand why anyone would buy these. I still wonder, but to each their own.
What, a first-gen RAV4, or a CUV in general?
If the former: the look and fun of a Tracker or Sidekick without such a bone-jarring ride.
If the latter: Upright seating position, ease of egress/ingress, (relatively) good visibility, not much of an MPG penalty anymore compared to a sedan.
For the CUV also: cargo space, depending on model. That’s one of the reasons that the eventual replacement for my wife’s Forte Koup will probably be a CUV–shortlist is Sportage, CX-5, CR-V. It’d be nice to have something that we can put bulky cargo in (small pieces of furniture, etc) without having to rent a van, and with no illusions of going off-road, that capability isn’t needed. Neither of us wants a minivan and she doesn’t want a wagon.
That’s just it…these were all about looks. Ride and handling was not exactly good either.
OK, so I do understand the kind of people who would buy one. I just don’t have that mentality myself.
As for modern CUVs, some are better than others and a blanket statement can’t be made. Many are overpriced substitutes for vans or wagons and many have ridiculously sloped rear hatches that effectively negate any cargo hauling benefits. They have their advantages too, but I’d bet money that the majority are bought for the image.
I actually passed a red one like this on the road a few weeks back and was awed at how tiny it was compared to all the other cars around. Definitely a car I hadn’t thought about in a long time.
Someone I know has one she is about 5ft tall so she fits it they are very cramped and uncomfortable cars for regular sized humans.
There are still lots of these around over here, the newer ones have reasonable power and better road manners but horrific fuel consumption, these early examples also sucked the gas to produce any reasonable performance the 2.0 Corona engines were never economical no matter which car Toyota put it in and having to push a tall box through the air didnt help.
I recall some journalists reacting to these with horror when they were launched (in the UK anyway). They basically saw them as yet another sign that society was going to hell in a handcart. An off-roader that can’t go off road!
Would rather have a real station wagon (for it’s load lugging capability) instead of a CUV, but I’m in a very tiny minority.
You see the hard and soft top 2 door RAV4s every now and then in this area, I think there are 2 or 3 soft tops and 3 or 4 hardtops around.
Honda built a 2 door CUV about this time that wasn’t sold in the U.S., the 1st generation HR-V. Even early in that car’s “llifetime” Honda realized the market for the 2 door was small and added 2 more doors. Then they discontinued the HR-V for 10-11 years.
I would too if they still made something like a Buick Electra Estate.
Be careful, they might rename the Enclave while we’re not paying attention!
I prefer the term “tall wagon” to “CUV”. Put ’em in their place.
*Tall wagon with ground clearance. A tall wagon is an MPV or minivan. Granted, the largest CUVs don’t have much more ground clearance than a minivan, but the largest CUVs (the only truly full-sized ones IMO, not just three-row midsizers), the Flex, MKT, and the GM Lambda CUVs, are sold by companies that don’t have a minivan anyway.
I had forgotten about them until a year or so ago. I parked next to one and as i was walking away I realized it ended way to soon, causing me to do a double take and realize that I had forgotten about the fact that they used to offer the 2dr and in a folding top version too. Saw one a month or so ago sitting in the spot in front of the local gas station that people often park their cars for sale at. I was on my way out of town for the night and it was gone the next time I went by.
Sister in law had one. We called it the “half-a-car”.
Reverse CC effect strikes – saw one of these a few weeks ago. I’d say there aren’t that many first gen Rav4’s still running around here any more.
I literally see more Dihatsu Rockys than I see soft-top RAV4.
The short version looks as awkward as the Trooper 2 door….
Here’s a really rare one I caught a few years ago. An EV.
Nice catch!
I tend to forget about these guys too, though the soft-top 2-door versions seem more common than the hardtop ones.
The manner in which that red has faded and the clearcoat gone missing is positively GM-worthy. Looks like what happened to my wife’s Alero, but even worse. I’m thinking that door must have been repainted at some point, unless it’s made out of a different material that did a better job of keeping its paint attached.