OT: 2015 Toyota RAV4? Yay or Nay?
- Thread starter PennSt8er
- Start date
Other than the dreadful styling, there's not much to be said about the RAV as far as negatives - i believe it to be premium-priced (over-priced) even in its base form.... But people keep shelling out for these things so it's difficult to blame Toyota USA... Rav has been a strong competitor since it invented the crossover segment back in '96. ( i owned a '98L and it was fantastic other than it being scary in the snow... Gen1 were the coolest of the Ravs imho... Now they're bloated)... You'll like the strong re-sale retention....
You're using the wrong tires in winter.... All-season tires eat ass in the snow regardless of how many are spinning.... If you want my opinion, go Find a FWD Rav4 (you'll have your work cut out for you - but they can be found) languishing on the dealer lot, negotiate the price down (yeah, itvis possible to negotiate on a Toyota...even a Toyota dealer will get the itch to move the FWD model off his lot, you'll save thousands) then buy (4) Continental WinterContact ice+snow tires on sexy black steelies for $700 and wave to all of the other AWD believers as you zing past them in February... Laughing all the way....
AWD is the latest way automakers have come up with to get you to part with an extra $2k ... They used to get you to pony up for that stupid fake-wood panelling or two-tone paint or vinyl roof on your Cutlass Supreme... Then useless deck-lid spoilers on your Accord or Camry, now it's stupid big wheel/tire combos and un-needed AWD on your cars and pseudo-SUVs
AWD is the latest way automakers have come up with to get you to part with an extra $2k ... They used to get you to pony up for that stupid fake-wood panelling or two-tone paint or vinyl roof on your Cutlass Supreme... Then useless deck-lid spoilers on your Accord or Camry, now it's stupid big wheel/tire combos and un-needed AWD on your cars and pseudo-SUVs
Last edited:
Go for a 2016 Mazda cx5. It has everything and not as noisy. Check it out. Just picked one up last week and it was either the RAV4 or cx5.
I have a 2015 RAV XL and 2015 CX-5 Grand Touring Tech. Both are nice vehicles in their own right but since the Mazda is loaded up I do prefer that vehicle. I didn't even consider the RAV limited since this car is for my son for law school. To me the ride is similar, light steering feel but the CX-5 does seem to have a little more zip. The other thing to consider is the RAV has a smallish fuel tank, just filled it up this evening and from light on it only took a little over 12 gals. Greatly decreased your range. Still a nice vehicle though. I have absolutely nothing bad to say about the Mazda.
Better ride, quieter and smoother, it's a 2016 and it has every bell and whistle. When you get the navigation tell them you want just the chip not the entire package. It's $350 vs $1700. You just need the navigation, not all the other stuff that comes in the package.
Beyond the aesthetical superiority of the Mazda, the CX-5 is well-regarded for handling and sportiness... I've owned both Toyotas and Mazda, and while Toyota's have a tremendous resale-value, i'd be less prone to sell a Mazda as they're fun to own/drive IMHO... Plus, cX-5's aren't in every other spot in the Wegmans parking lot ala Toyota and Honda... my Mazda dealer is mucho-friendlier than the hubris-laced Toyota showroom
Just bought a cx5 GT tech. Gorgeous. If you do it in July, and plan to finance some, get your best price firm in writing and then tell them you want to use Mazda financing to take advantage of the $500.00 Mazda rebate. It is good till the end of the month. They will not tell you about it and try and squirm out of the deal or sell you on protection packages and Lord knows what else. Their objective is to sell you the financing and pocket the rebate from Mazda. Be careful. The company and car is great. Some of the dealers just the opposite. Know what rate (APR) you can get from a local bank and the approximate monthly payment before you walk in the door.They should be in the ball park.
Last edited:
I started researching the CX-5 after M2 endorsed it a few months ago and I've been a lifelong Honda and Toyota owner. This included talking to owners who unanimously Rav-ed (sorry for the pun) about it. Planning on buying one in 4 more years when my 2000 Honda Accord gets retired.
I'm a Honda man. Test drove the CR-V EX yesterday vs. the Mazda CX-5. Mazda is nice, but the CR-V is roomier inside and comparable models (CR-V EX vs. CX-5 Touring) gets you the sunroof on the Honda while you pay extra for the Mazda. For $100 you can get the Honda app for Navigation without having to get the package. Slightly bigger gas tank in Honda as well as better gas mileage. I also prefer the CR-V site lines and it has heated front seats, which Mazda does not have. I don't think you can go wrong with either model, I just prefer the Honda and you get more features for the same $.
Who's got the time to get their tires changed twice a year? Also, if you don't have a garage, where do you store these snow tires during the summer?
Nay!
Step up and drive what the big-boys drive (like me) LOL!! I drive a 2015 Toyota 4Runner Trail! Awesome vehicle!!
Seriously? Who's got the time to get winched out of the median in January? not me.
Do you get your oil changed twice a year? It's not too tough to problem-solve this one...
I used to swap tires in my driveway but now just take them with me to my nearest chain-store tire retailer and they do it for hardly anything with my oil change... Beats draggin' the jack and hammer-wrench out
If you don't have a garage then you are a sissy anyway and deserve to be mocked by those of us with proper winter gear
. There do exist service stations/ chain stores that will store your winter rims/tires for a nominal fee, some do it via TireRack....
I've driven nothing but RAV4 AWDs since 2002 and highly recommend them. Have only had all-season tires and have had zero problems getting around the Johnstown area in snow and ice.
I've had to make do with all-seasons on my company-issued AWD Subaru Legacy, and it's marginally better in the snow / slop than a FWD car with the same all season (ie: no season) tires, and that might be stretching it... Alas it is noticeably better, by far, when starting from rest, red-lights et al, but as far as everything else - any difference is marginal and certainly not worth spending a couple grand for... On the other hand - my wife's Honda Fit is, hands-down, superior to my Subie in tracking/stopping/accelerating in garbage-conditions with 4 Yokohama iceGuard iG20's... No contest, end of story... Forget any other bullshit the manufacturers tell you. Same experience with other FWD cars I've slapped snows onto... No comparison
If you have a kid that is a driver - the best thing you can do for them is to slap 4 capable snow/ice tires on their car...
I absolutely agree that FWD is better than AWD in 95% of snow and ice conditions. And it simply makes sense. Pulling a car around a curve or accelerating is just more efficient and safer than pushing. Not a lot different than pushing a string as opposed to pulling it. (sometimes, like MB or Audi, your only option is RWD or AWD).
The only difference is when snow gets a foot, or so, deep. Here, having four wheels to "drive" the car helps in keeping it from getting stuck. However, the only time that really happens in normal driving conditions is if you've gone onto a shoulder or in your driveway. So, if you've got a really long driveway that is often discarded in heavy snow areas, the AWD may be a better option. Or, if you off road (like to go ice fishing, cross country skiing, or just for fun).
My $.02, FWIW.
The only difference is when snow gets a foot, or so, deep. Here, having four wheels to "drive" the car helps in keeping it from getting stuck. However, the only time that really happens in normal driving conditions is if you've gone onto a shoulder or in your driveway. So, if you've got a really long driveway that is often discarded in heavy snow areas, the AWD may be a better option. Or, if you off road (like to go ice fishing, cross country skiing, or just for fun).
My $.02, FWIW.
Just and FYI, Obli. Most AWD vehicles are FWD vehicles 99% of the time -- and the rear wheels only get power during either hard acceleration and/or front wheel slippage.
Seriously? Who's got the time to get winched out of the median in January? not me.
Do you get your oil changed twice a year? It's not too tough to problem-solve this one...
I used to swap tires in my driveway but now just take them with me to my nearest chain-store tire retailer and they do it for hardly anything with my oil change... Beats draggin' the jack and hammer-wrench out
If you don't have a garage then you are a sissy anyway and deserve to be mocked by those of us with proper winter gear
Well, if you need to get winched out of the median in January (while driving anything other than a RWD pickup truck), then you are a dumb sissy driver who deserves the headache associated with getting winched out of the median in January.
I drove a Datsun F-10 during my days at Clarion. Only used regular tires. Only time I ever had difficulty was when the snow was to deep. We were in the snow belt and it did snow a lot. It was even better doing donuts in reverse because of the FWD.
Doesn't matter if you're stuck in a foot of snow with AWD... having four crappy All Season tires spinning / not biting is just as effective as two all-season tires spinning and not biting, believe me...
I say that from direct experience after a sudden and severe encounter with understeer turning from a main road onto a PLOWED but untreated access-road to a parking lot back in February.. stuffed my Legacy up onto curbside snowheap - after I came to rest the tires just spun and spun and spun because there was no bite in my all-season Goodyear Eagles... back-n-forth rocking did S-Q-U-A-T... eff you AWD and your BS capability... it's all in the tires, baby...
I used to be a Honda man... the shortcomings of Honda's "real-time" AWD are not a secret... you're handing over a lot of extra cash to Honda for a FWD system that receives questionable quasi-AWD support when summoned... the internets are loaded with test-footage of CRVs struggling on slippery surfaces because only a pittance of torque is sent to the rear
Here is a good site to get an idea of what others are paying for the CX-5
http://www.mazdas247.com/forum/showthread.php?123811693-Current-selling-price-for-CX-5/page133
http://www.mazdas247.com/forum/showthread.php?123811693-Current-selling-price-for-CX-5/page133
Isn't the Rav4 equivalent the Lexus NX???
I chuckled when I saw Lexus was doing that but, again, I can't blame them...
I can't think of a compelling case to buy any hoity-toity rebadged version of anything (eg: LX460 cs. Toyota Land Cruiser / RX350 vs Toyota Highlander / Acura MDX vs Honda Pilot) ... unless you venture into the Audi TT vs VW Beetle et al arguments where there is at least some significant differentiation even though they share platforms... but that's just me....
Were it me I'd skip the phooo-phooo Lexus and just grab me the nicest RAV4 and take the understated route... the current grill/fascia theme on Lexus sedans and Xovers is simply embarrassing
If you lived where I lived, and drove up the side of the Rocky Mountains every few weeks, you would see a compelling case to buy a "rebadged" version. 90 more horsepower (33% more), 90 more ft-lbs of torque (50% more) and the ability to take over the shift pattern of the transmission are pretty significant differences that I got by going with the RDX instead of the CRV (not to mention the longer warranty).
I would have loved to save the money and just go with a decked out CRV, but the significantly extra horsepower and torque, and ability to control the shifting going up and down the mountains, are key upgrades that make it well worth the little extra $$.
you bring up a valid point re: 6cyls being offered only with the hoity-toity badges... it'd still be bullshit for 98% of folks because the base-engines are fantastic - but I can't challenge the Rocky Mtns aspect you cite and how altitude can take a great 4cyl engine and render it a wheezing cluster of clatter...
carry-on, citizen!
I bought a 2015 RAV4 XLE AWD 2 months ago. I love it. I think it rides well, doesn't feel like a truck or SUV ride to me. I think it gets decent gas mileage. I've averaged between 25-26 MPG since I've owned. Much roomier then you would think. Honestly this is the first body style of these that I actually like.
That's because it's not a truck nor an SUV, nor is it remotely related to a truck... It's a little more than a longroof Corolla that Toyota will charge you an extra $10k for... Because it sits up higher, has larger wheels and tires, has an extra prop-shaft running to the rear diff... And,mmostly,because it's been proven there are a lot of you out there who will happily pay the extra $10k for it
Brilliant marketing by Toyota... They invented this segment with the original RAV (my favorite)
This - Mazdas are more fun to drive and have nicer interiors than Toyotas.
Other than the CX-5, would check out the new Hyundai Tucson which is rolling into dealer lots now (looks like a premium compact CUV).
A coworker was looking to trade her RAV4 in on a new model. She looked at the CRV and RAV4 and asked my opinion... "Did you check out the Mazda CX5?", "No", "I recommend checking it out before you pull the trigger and spend an extra 5 - 7 thousand on the Honda or Toyota."
2 weeks later she pulls up in a brand new CX5.
After having driven all three I asked her opinion and why she chose the Mazda.
1. Exterior Styling
2. Gas Mileage - Mazda beat both CRV and RAV4
3. Fuel Range
4. Interior Styling
5. Comfort
6. Ride Quality
7. Pep and Handling
She just felt overall the CX5 was by far and away the BEST model she test drove. Her and fiancé actually went back to the Honda and Toyota dealers to retest the CRV and RAV4 to ensure they weren't selling themselves short. Here in MD we don't get enough really bad weather to justify buying extra wheels and snow tires. Never had an issue with good treaded all-seasons on any of my AWD vehicles... key is knowing how to drive in the snow, and what to do when your tires are no longer making contact with the road surface.
2 weeks later she pulls up in a brand new CX5.
After having driven all three I asked her opinion and why she chose the Mazda.
1. Exterior Styling
2. Gas Mileage - Mazda beat both CRV and RAV4
3. Fuel Range
4. Interior Styling
5. Comfort
6. Ride Quality
7. Pep and Handling
She just felt overall the CX5 was by far and away the BEST model she test drove. Her and fiancé actually went back to the Honda and Toyota dealers to retest the CRV and RAV4 to ensure they weren't selling themselves short. Here in MD we don't get enough really bad weather to justify buying extra wheels and snow tires. Never had an issue with good treaded all-seasons on any of my AWD vehicles... key is knowing how to drive in the snow, and what to do when your tires are no longer making contact with the road surface.
+1
FWIW I've had multiple people here at work take my advice and go look at the CX-5... there are now multiple CX-5's in our parking lot.... each is a first-time Mazda customer and they regularly thank me for recommending that they check out the Mazda showroom...
Says you.
And you are??
Someone who follows the auto industry very closely....
But, hey - you don't have to acknowledge what I stated, but it would be hard to go against what Car&Driver, Autoweek, Motor Trend, and pretty much all the other automotive publications have stated about the CX-5 and the RAV-4, much less the Mazda6 vs. the Camry, the Mazda3 vs. the Corolla, etc.- if you don't care to drive them back to back.
Toyota is widely considered the beige brand.
The only real downside to the CX-5 is that it doesn't have as much power as some of the other choices, but the typical buyers of compact CUVs aren't looking for the equivalent of an SRT.
Another option (probably too late for OP) would be the Nissan Qashquai (might change the name for the NA market) - which is Nissan's Euro compact CUV (so a little smaller and little nicer inside than the Rogue) which they will be bringing over to the US in the not too distant future.
