MM Test-Drive/Mini-Review: 2016 Toyota RAV-4
#61
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
It's certainly a nice update. I was split between leasing a Rav4 or CR-V about a year ago. While the Toyota was marginally cheaper, I could clearly understand why. The interior was very cheap in comparison to the CR-V, which had a homely interior design but everything was high-quality for it's class. I would argue that Hondas are overall better than their Toyota counterparts, they just feel less cheap.
Agreed on the cheap interior and exterior trim, but it 's hard to beat the reliability of Toyota drivetrains.
#62
Lexus Fanatic
#63
I have sat in brand new 2016/2017 Tiguan, in 2016 Hyundai Tucson and 2017 Kia Sportage. All had a lot plastics that were questionable - actually I was quite disappointed by all of them since they were brand new models.
Best for me was 2017 Seat Aztec which is Tiguan's brother but it isnt missing anything when it comes to interior quality compared to Tiguan, while having a lot smaller price.
#64
Lexus Fanatic
I don't expect Toyota to have a Lexus quality interior, I would like to see Toyota have an interior that isn't the cheapest feeling interior in its class, which IMHO right now they do not have one model that doesn't have the cheapest feeling interior in its class.
I'd like Toyota to have a Hyundai or Kia quality interior. Not too much to ask IMHO. Hell, my Kia Sedona has significantly better leather quality than my $80,000 LS460. That's just wrong.
I'd like Toyota to have a Hyundai or Kia quality interior. Not too much to ask IMHO. Hell, my Kia Sedona has significantly better leather quality than my $80,000 LS460. That's just wrong.
#65
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
However, it is also true that, as you note, none of the interiors in this mainstream-CUV class can really be considered luxury-class. IMO, the Buick Encore's, overall, is the best, but an argument can be made that the RAV-4 competes more directly with the cheaper, much less plush Chevrolet Trax, which is done on the same Chevy-Sonic and Opel-based platform as the Encore.
#66
Lexus Fanatic
I drove everything in this class a month ago. The CX-5 has a very good quality interior that doesn't feel cheap. The Tuscon is not as nice as it, but it also feels upscale with good materials. The CR-V is very utilitarian and bland, but also feels high quality. The Rav-4 feels cheap. I didn't even drive it, would never consider buying one with so many other more compelling entries.
Yes everything has low quality plastics around in this segment, but you can design an interior in such a way that it plays to its strengths. Colors, trims, contrasts. Toyota doesn't even really try IMHO. Better than they were say 5 years ago, but a long way left to go.
Yes everything has low quality plastics around in this segment, but you can design an interior in such a way that it plays to its strengths. Colors, trims, contrasts. Toyota doesn't even really try IMHO. Better than they were say 5 years ago, but a long way left to go.
#67
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Yeah....my brother spent only 25K on a new Kia Sportage last year, and just loves it. The interior may not LOOK plush, but it, along with the exterior and trim, uses good materials underneath.
#68
Lexus Fanatic
Upper trim Kias look plush too. Looks good, feels good. Even the harder plastics have a higher quality feel in them, you don't see mold lines and stuff like you do from Toyota.
The leather REALLY pisses me off.
The leather REALLY pisses me off.
#69
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
One thing in the RAV-4's favor, though, that will offset some of the interior cheapness (and, yes, I forgot to mention it in the review, even though I had tried out the feature myself) is a standard 60/40 rear cloth seat with armrest and built-in reclining. It is unusual for a vehicle in this class to provide reclining rear seats for passenger comfort...and it is standard even in the base LE model.
So, given that fact, I'll (slightly) modify some of my earlier comments on the material-cheapness inside.
So, given that fact, I'll (slightly) modify some of my earlier comments on the material-cheapness inside.
#70
Pole Position
Although I am somewhat bias, I do not feel the RAV4 interior is "cheap" as compared to the CRV. IMHO they have better materials (plastics and non-fuzzy cloth), but the design is much more old-fashion and conservative. Now if you compare it to say the CX5, I can understand it is definitely not as modernized and is seemingly more cheap. This is coming from a 09' and '14 RAV4 owner that is looking to get into a new SUV as well.
#71
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Now if you compare it to say the CX5, I can understand it is definitely not as modernized and is seemingly more cheap. This is coming from a 09' and '14 RAV4 owner that is looking to get into a new SUV as well.
#72
Lexus Fanatic
I agree with Mike, materials are materials
#73
Lexus Champion
Mike, please elaborate. What do you mean by "materials are materials"?
#74
Lexus Fanatic
He means that the quality of materials don't have anything to do with how they're styled.
#75
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
IMO, and in the sense that I'm using the term, cheap, unimpressive materials make no difference to me whether they are used in an interior that not only looks cheap, but also in an interior that doesn't necessarily look cheap on the surface, but IS cheap and flimsy underneath. The 2014+ Toyota Avalon, IMO, is a classic example of the latter.......nice-lookng chrome/brushed-metal/wood-tone trim which is nothing but thin flimsy plastic and/or loosely-attached parts underneath. So, to a somewhat lesser extent, is the interior of the big Buick Enclave....a lot of glittery flash on the surface, but nothing but traditional GM-grade plastic underneath.....only that plastic isn't quite as thin as what is on the Avalon's interior.
So, my basic point is that it doesn't matter what kind of actual styling is done with materials, what color they are, or how much glitter is painted or plated on top of them, or how expensive or cheap the interior simply LOOKS. IMO what matters is what those materials inside are actually made of. So, it may not LOOK like a duck, but if it feels like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck......well, I think you get the picture.
BTW.....if you didn't notice earlier, when I first wrote up the review, I had forgotten to mention one important thing inside...the standard manually-reclining mechanisms the 60/40 rear seats, even on the base LE version (I tried them out myself, of course). Rear seat-recliners are something not often seen in this class of SUVs/CUVs, and contributes significantly to rear-seat comfort. That is something that, IMO, Toyota should be given credit for, even with all of the questionable or otherwise cheap materials inside. (I went back and added those comments)
So, my basic point is that it doesn't matter what kind of actual styling is done with materials, what color they are, or how much glitter is painted or plated on top of them, or how expensive or cheap the interior simply LOOKS. IMO what matters is what those materials inside are actually made of. So, it may not LOOK like a duck, but if it feels like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck......well, I think you get the picture.
BTW.....if you didn't notice earlier, when I first wrote up the review, I had forgotten to mention one important thing inside...the standard manually-reclining mechanisms the 60/40 rear seats, even on the base LE version (I tried them out myself, of course). Rear seat-recliners are something not often seen in this class of SUVs/CUVs, and contributes significantly to rear-seat comfort. That is something that, IMO, Toyota should be given credit for, even with all of the questionable or otherwise cheap materials inside. (I went back and added those comments)
Last edited by mmarshall; 04-12-16 at 07:24 PM.