MM Test-Drive/Mini-Review: 2016 Toyota RAV-4
04-14-16, 07:13 PM
#76
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)
Agreed on the back seat in the Rav4. Its very comfy and large car(like an Avalon) room for two people back there. Easy to fall asleep in on long trips, as I have done on several occasions. Its way better than any sedan or wagon priced similarly IMO.
04-14-16, 07:36 PM
#78
Oh that is one thing they did fix, I hated that rear door design on the older ones(and the Lexus GX). Stupid door was always in the way when you were trying to unload stuff onto the curb or were in a tight space like a garage.
04-14-16, 08:07 PM
#79
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Aron9000
Oh that is one thing they did fix, I hated that rear door design on the older ones(and the Lexus GX). Stupid door was always in the way when you were trying to unload stuff onto the curb or were in a tight space like a garage.
Last edited by mmarshall; 04-14-16 at 08:11 PM.
04-14-16, 10:26 PM
#80
Lexus Fanatic
Hate that barn door, I agree.
04-15-16, 06:45 AM
#82
Lexus Test Driver
Anyway, any idea why the RAV4 hybrid has such high fuel consumption? 34 mpg combined EPA rating isn't great and even light footed reviewers are reporting similar numbers. Maybe the near-4000 lb weight has something to do with it, along with the chunky aero.
My ES300h easily hits 40 mpg on a highway cruise and I can get close to 50 mpg on an urban commute, and this huge car weighs 300 lbs less than the RAV4 hybrid. At least Toyota is pricing the hybrid very near the gasoline variant, probably to increase uptake.
My ES300h easily hits 40 mpg on a highway cruise and I can get close to 50 mpg on an urban commute, and this huge car weighs 300 lbs less than the RAV4 hybrid. At least Toyota is pricing the hybrid very near the gasoline variant, probably to increase uptake.
04-15-16, 07:01 AM
#83
Lexus Fanatic
The ESh is more aerodynamic. No AWD to increase drag and fuel consumption. Of course mileage is better.
04-15-16, 07:31 AM
#84
Lexus Test Driver
The AWD on the RAV4 and NX hybrid is fully electric, there's no propshaft running to the back of the car. Guess it's down to the weight and bad aero. I haven't seen a single hybrid SUV that offers decent mileage, even the Volvo and BMW X5 plugins have atrocious mileage when the battery pack gets depleted.
04-15-16, 08:25 AM
#85
Lexus Fanatic
The AWD still is going to create more drag. The aerodynamics is also huge, ground clearance, etc.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post