When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
IN A NUTSHELL: America's top-selling SUV redoes itself for a Fifth-Generation
CLOSEST AMERICAN-MARKET COMPETITORS: Honda CR-V, Mazda CX-5, Ford Escape, Chevrolet Equinox, Kia Sportage, Hyundai Tucson, Mitsubishi Outlander, Dodge Journey, Jeep Cherokee, VW Tiguan, Subaru Forester, Nissan Rogue.
OVERVIEW:
For the Annual Holiday Review this year, I decided, instead of the usual Lexus-badged vehicle or upmarket/luxury-class vehicle, to concentrate on the all-new Fifth-Generation Toyota RAV-4 instead. The RAV-4 has become a virtual household word across the U.S., and demand (and sales/leases) for it are so strong that it now, in third place, trails only the Ford F-150 and Chevrolet Silverado full-size pickups, which are also American institutions. And right on the heels of the RAV-4 is sales, of course, are a number of worthy competitors. I also received several requests for a full-review, both from CL members and outside. Toyota, though, took its time getting this new, latest version to market, and they are reaching hitting Washington, D.C.-area dealerships just in time for the Holidays. As I write this, the all-new Lexus UX, which is one size smaller than the RAV-4, is also just starting to arrive.....I saw the first one listed today. I'll review that vehicle in the near future.
The compact-sized, crossover, unibody, car-based SUV (Sport-Utility Vehicle), better known in the auto press as "Cute-Ute" or CUV, has, for the most part, become the very definition of new-vehicle sales, particularly in the American market, where they often go out the front door at dealerships as fast as they can be ordered. You'll notice that I listed a dozen RAV-4 American-market competitors alone in the low-priced Cute-Ute field...and that does NOT include the ones from Suzuki, Renault, Opel/Vauxhall, and many other brands that are sold overseas but not in the American market. Nor, of course, does it include the premium-brand/upscale Cute-Utes here in the U.S., from companies like Acura, Buick, Lexus, Cadillac, Lincoln, Audi, BMW, Mercedes, Alfa-Romeo, Volvo, and Jaguar, which are roughly the same size as the RAV-4, but in a higher price/prestige class. Obviously, there is tremendous consumer demand (and company profits) for this type of vehicle, and almost every automaker offers one or more in its American-market line-up.
Since, according to the laws of physics, matter cannot occupy the same space as other matter (something has to give), it also begs the question of course, of just what these Cute-Ute vehicles are actually displacing, and what is yielding ground to them. Well, in a word....sedans. Even once-hugely- popular sedans like the Toyota Camry, Honda Accord, Ford Fusion/Taurus, and Buick Lacrosse have taken major sales-hits in the last few years, and, indeed, as I write this, some plant-closings have been announced, and a number of Ford and GM sedans may soon be history. This, of course, is pretty much a repeat of the same thing that happened some 22-23 years ago, when GM dropped the big, full-size V8, body-on-frame sedans and re-tooled its Arlington, TX plant for truck and SUV production. American consumers are once again abandoning sedans for SUVs, but, this time, instead of conventional truck-based SUVs, the shift En-Masse is to the smaller unibody Cute-Utes, which are not usually as roomy inside, but offer better ride, handling, refinement, road-manners, and fuel mileage than older, conventional SUVs. Of course, Cute-Utes are not for everyone...the continuing strong sales the Toyota 4Runner and the big full-size truck-based SUVs from Ford and GM prove that. But CUVs are, for now, probably the hottest thing in the American marketplace.
And, of course, the RAV-4 was, in some ways, the vehicle that generally started it all, although some automotive historians (and I agree, to an extent) credit the true start to the 1980/81 American Motors Eagle and its then-innovative, car-based, viscous-center-clutch AWD system that allowed its use on any surface...not just on slick surfaces or off-road. This, of course made it much easier for the driver, not to have to fool with locking/unocking wheel-hubs, manual-shift transfer-cases, or when kind of road-surface was under his wheels at any given moment. But the Eagle was clearly a vehicle fifteen years ahead of its time, and, like most American-designed vehicles of the period, was plagued with engineering and quality problems. The Eagle, essentially an AMC Concord wagon with extra trim/cladding, a raised-suspension, and the new AWD system, failed to save AMC in the long run, and the company folded, even after Renault and Chrysler ownership. The innovative AWD system, of course, was further developed by Subaru and Audi (to great success, obviously)...but that is the subject of other reviews, not this one.
There were also some other smaller SUVs on the market at the time, like the wildly successful 1984 Jeep Cherokee, and its then-new unibody design was also somewhat more car-like than previous Jeeps, but its road-manners, particularly ride comfort, could not put it in the class of a true CUV. The first true CUVs, on a large scale, did not reach American market until the mid-to-late 1990s. In 1995, Subaru introduced the successful Outback AWD wagon, but, like the AMC Eagle some 15 years before, it was more of a high-stance station wagon than a true CUV. A year later, in 1996, Toyota, after an earlier introduction in its Japanese home-market, brought the first RAV-4 to the U.S., in both 3-door and 5-door versions. The 3-door version was not successful....indeed, I saw very few of them, even at stock at dealerships, and, compared to the 5-door, was somewhat awkward-looking. The 5-door, though, was hugely successful, often brought mark-ups at dealerships over list, and also won over a lot of customers downsizing from larger SUVs. Competitors, of course, soon followed...the most successful in the short-term being the Honda CR-V and Subaru Forester, which were introduced the next year, in 1997. But the field, of course, continued to expand, and includes the literally dozens of models we see today.
I liked the 5-door version of the First-Generation RAV-4, and thought it was quite-well-built....it came out during a period when Toyota, IMO, was producing some of its best products. The Second-Generation model was also well-built, but some of the interior materials were starting to convert to thinner, harder plastic, and the body sheet metal seemed thinner. This process accelerated with the Third-Generation model. Hybrid and full-electric RAV-4s were offered, but the full-electric was not very successful due to its high price, limited cruising range, low-production numbers, and ratline lack of recharging-outlets (California, in general, has invested in charge-outlets more than any other state). I did not like the Fourth-Generation model at all...its front end, IMO, looked goofy, a number of the materials inside and out (except for the strong rear-seat-anchor hardware) felt thin and cheap, and the rear roofline and D-pillars were styled in a way that impeded rear visibility. IMO, it badly needed a new redesign........and now, we have it.
For 2019, the gas versions of the new 5th-Generation RAV-4 come in five different trim-levels....the gas/electric Hybrids will be introduced next spring. The base LE version starts at $25,500, the XLE at $27,300, the XLE Premium at $29,500, the Adventure at $32,900, and the top-line Limited at $33,500. All come with a non-turbo in-line 2.5L four of 203 HP / 184 ft-lbs. of torque and an 8-speed automatic Select-Shift transmission. All come with a choice of FWD or AWD except for the Adventure version, on which (as the name might suggest, for mild off-roading) the AWD is standard.
The new RAV-4 is a significant improvement over the fourth-generation model on several fronts, although the interior materials used in the base models are not impressive....and I'll get to those details later in the review. I looked at several versions today, from the base LE models up to the top-line Limited, and, for the test-drive, chose a Limited AWD version, with only minor options, that listed for a little over $37,000.
MODEL REVIEWED: 2019 Toyota RAV-4 Limited AWD
BASE PRICE: $34,900
OPTIONS:
Blizzard White Pearl Paint: $395
Alloy Wheel Locks: $65
All Weather Floor Liners: $169
Cargo Liner: $100
Door Edge Guards: $140
Door Sill Protectors: $ $199
Roof Rack Cross-Bars: $315
DESTINATION/FREIGHT: $1045 (A little steep for a vehicle this size)
Better outward visibility than on previous version.
Excellent interior door-pulls/handles.
Big, easy-to-use climate-control dials.
Decent (but not soft) ride comfort.
Reasonably good road/wind noise control.
Nicely-done paint job.
Some nice paint colors available...but not on all models.
Interior and exterior styling (IMO) light-years ahead of its predecessor.
Nice-looking two-tone seats on Limited model.
Good seating room inside, especially without the sunroof.
Much better exterior visibility out the rear than before.
Long previous record of Better-Than-Average reliability.
Huge demand means (probable) low depreciation.
Large number of dealerships means sales/service almost anywhere.
MINUSES:
Cheap, unimpressive interior materials in low-line versions.
No underhood insulation pad, even in top-line versions.
Manual underhood prop-rod.
Non-Turbo 2.5L four OK, but not not particularly impressive.
Paint colors should not be restricted by trim-version.
Very complex video-screen and Driver-Infomation displays.
Tacky-looking video-screen mount.
Brake pedal in somewhat odd location.
Jumpy throttle from rest when cold.
No exclusivity.....everybody and their brother owns one.
EXTERIOR:
IMO (and, from what I've seen, also the opinion of a number of other reviewers) the exterior of the new RAV-4 is its biggest and best improvement over the previous model. Gone is the somewhat (IMO) odd and frumpy-looking front end that was not only on the RAV-4 but a number of other Toyota products as well. In its place is a far more chunky, bold look, with more-conventional SUV styling in both the front and the rear. The rear-quarter still has thick C and D-pillars, but, nevertheless, with a different shape, allows better outward visibility than before. Most of the sheet metal feels pretty solid, and the doors all open and close with a solid feel and thunk (the hood is a major exception.....see below). As with most vehicle in this class, black plastic/vinyl body-cladding surrounds the entire lower-part of the body and up in the wheel-wells, to protect the paint from salt/gravel/abrasives and other road debris. Door-edge guards are offered as a factory option....usually they are dealer-installed. Body-side moldings, to protect from parking-lot dings, are also a factory option....IMO they should be standard, but I understand that some people just don't like the look of them. At least, however, they are now available again from the factory....that was something that manufacturers neglected for years (and something I complained about a number of times). The paint job appeared to be the usual Toyota/Lexus excellence, though it was somewhat difficult, because of the paint's white color, gray sky, and off/on very light drizzle, to accurately gauge its gloss-level or amount of orange-peel. There were some nice paint colors available (such as the bright electric medium blue), but, IMO, like with some other vehicles, there is too much restriction in what colors are available on certain trim-levels. I see no credible reason to restrict them, especially since all of the trim models go down the same assembly line in the same plant (whether that plant be in Japan or Canada) and through the same paint-section in the plant. Base-level versions get stamped-steel wheels and plastic wheel covers....higher-line versions, of course, have alloy wheels and somewhat lower-profile tires.
Anyhow, on the new exterior.....Good Job.
UNDERHOOD:
Looks like two extremes here. The VERY lightweight hood felt like a tin can, sounded like one when closing, and, even on the top-line Limited model, lacked an insulation pad to help control engine noise (just bare metal), Even so, however, the engine wasn't particularly noisy unless revved....more on that later. And, no gas struts to hold the hood up for you....even on the Limited, you fumble around with a manual prop-rod (at least the feather-weight hood makes it relatively easy for people with weak arms or shoulders).
Underneath the hood, though, in the engine compartment itself, the general layout was excellent, especially by today's hide-everything standards. The transversely-mounted 2.5L four fits in quite well, there is room to reach a number of engine components around the block, and the plastic engine cover hides only a few things. Next to the engine, on the right, the battery and its terminals are easily accessed and uncovered, and, as with most vehicles, dipsticks, filler-caps, and fluid-reservoirs are generally easy to reach.
Again, in general, good job on the underhood layout.
INTERIOR:
Overall, the new interior is so-so, although I agree with Jill that there is a BIG difference between the low-line and top-line models inside in what you get for your money, even considering the roughly $8000 price difference between the LE and Limited version. The general styling and layout of the interior, except for the somewhat tacky-looking upright video-screen frame in the center of the dash.....automakers do that, instead of integrating the housing into the dash, because it is easy, cheap, and saves design-money. But, style-wise, the new interior is a big step ahead of the last version....particularly in the big, thick, solid, beefy, You-Grab-'Em near-vertical door-pulls built into all four doors, front and rear. That is a significant advantage over the competing Kia Sportage, which, inexplicably, has a big similar door-pull on the front passenger's side door, but not the driver's.
In the general level of trim, though, I was not impressed with the base LE version at all. The far nicer Limited interior, IMO, is worth every penny of its admittedly steep $8000 price difference. The LE version I sampled was coal-mine black inside, with cheap-looking and cheap-feeling plastic trim all over it, and with minimum of padded surfaces. I liked the feel of the black-cloth seats, but not much else, The Limited interior, in contrast, particularly with the two-tone light-gray Soft-Tex (imitation leather) seats, not only looked far better visually, but also felt a lot nicer too, with padded Soft-Tex covering most of the door-panels instead of the hard-plastic. Some of the hardware even felt better in the Limited version, as, for example, it had some more refined-feeling dials/controls than in the base version. A major problem on the top-line Limited version, though, was the complexity of the video-screen and Driver's-Information displays, which were quite complex and required a lot of flddling with the steering wheel controls and/or dash-buttons to find things in the menu.
Headroom in the front and rear is OK, even for fairly, tall persons, if you avoid the sunroof, though even with the sunroof it isn't too bad.....the new design of the rear end, of course, helps the headroom in back. Legroom in back is OK, too, as long as the front seats aren't adjusted too far back, and you aren't a typical NBA player. Graphics and colors on the screen and dash, though, are excellent (see my comments, below, on the drive-modes), and the layout of the buttons and controls is generally good except for some of the climate buttons, in the middle, under the dash, which may require some squinting for those who don't have surgeon-precise eyesight. Some other reviewers have panned the general level of seat-comfort, but I disagree. I found both the cloth seats and the Soft-Tex seats to be fairly comfortable, though, as with most Asian-desiened vehicles, the cushions were a little firmer than I'd prefer. Also, typical of some Asian-desiged vehicles are short cushions that don't provide a whole lot of upper-high support. Still, the seat padding was compliant enough that I had no problems with it.
So, overall a so-so grade inside....significantly better for the Limited than lower-line models.
CARGO COMPARTMENT/TRUNK:
Lift the rear hatch (it is powered, of course, on the Limited models), and you are treated to a generally roomy and space-efficient cargo area that, IMO, is significantly better-designed than on the previous version, although, again, the trim-materials on the base LE version are rather cheap, with hard plastic everywhere except thin black carpet/fabric on the floor. Low-line models also lack a cargo pull-cover to hide cargo from prying eyes....one did come on my Limited version. The rear seats, of course, fold down to extend the already roomy cargo area, and, under the floor, is a full-size temporary spare tire.
ON THE ROAD:
Start up the 2.5L four with the usual dash-button (most vehicles have them these days), and the rather large four idles reasonably smoothly and refined...though large-displacement fours, in general, for several reasons, don't always have the best reputation for refinement. On my test vehicle, it took somewhat more than the usual amount of cranking to get the engine to fire...I don't know if that signaled a weak fuel pump (sample defect), if the cold damp weather had anything to do with it (40 degrees and a light on/off drizzle), or if the engine just had not been started for awhile (not likely, because the vehicle had only been at the dealership a couple of days). Anyhow, once it got started, it ran fine except for some jumpiness on the throttle, starting up from rest, when cold. As the engine warmed, the jumpiness lessened noticeably, but it still took a somewhat careful touch on the pedal to get smooth starts. With only 184 ft-lbs. of torque on a vehicle this size, and the added weight/drag of AWD, this is no stoplight racer, but the amount of power is adequate, at least lightly-loaded, for most normal driving. As I mentioned back in the UNDERHOOD section, the lack of an underhood insulation pad causes some engine noise and exhaust-shuffling while accelerating, though it is not obtrusive. On the Limited version I drove, there were many different drive modes, not only the usual ECO / Normal / SPORT (which, when activated, changed the color of the ring on the speedometer from green to white to red), but could also tailor the drive line and AWD system to a number of different modes (snow, rocks, sand, etc....).
The 8-speed Select-Shift transmission is generally refined, and SPORT mode, as is usually the case, raises the automatic shift-points noticeably. The transmission shifts were audible, though, not because of any noise in the transmission itself, but because of the audible engine-noise changing RPMs on the shift, and the lack of that underhood pad. Still not what I'd call a noisy engine, though, and large-displacement fours, as aforementioned, are often difficult to keep quiet even with the underhood pads. Occasionally the 8-speed transmission, as with many newer transverse-transmissions with a large number of gears, would do a minor flare (slip) on the shift, which is sometimes necessary for the dog-clutches to engage properly (2-way dog clutches are sometimes used on transversely-mounted FWD automatics to allow a large number of gears in a compact casing). Wasn't pronounced enough, though for me to list it as a compliant....so I didn't.
The chassis, suspension, and steering were generally well-done, especially by traditional SUV/CUV standards. With the best of today's crossovers, it is difficult to tell much difference between them and sedans/coupes in their handling and overall feel unless you really push it. The Limited version, with its 19" wheels and 55-series tires, rode reasonably well over bumps, though the taller/narrower 17" wheels and 65-series tires on the lower-line models would probably ride a little smoother and be a little more to my liking. I didn't notice any porpoising or rocking-horse motions....this used to be a common problem on SUVs and CUVs, but has generally been engineered out (or almost out) of most contemporary designs. Steering response was ultra-smooth and generally good, though, of course, today's electric power steering units usually don't give you much road feel.....that was something that older hydraulic-unit BMWs, especially, used to truly excel at. Road and wind noise were fairly well masked for something in this class, though, as with many vehicles, porous asphalt and concrete produced more noise than traditional smooth asphalt. Brakes were fine, and generally effective, though the pedal was placed at a somewhat odd location....down and the the left of the gas, instead of at the usual (roughly) same height...so you have to move your feet down to the left more so then usual, and be careful not to snag the top of the brake pedal. With my big circus-clown Size-15 shoes, that takes a little care.
THE VERDICT:
Although I obviously found the base-level version to still have some shortcomings, for many of you who, despite the RAV-4's continuing popularity, did not spring for the previous model, it may (?) be time to open your wallets...the latest Fifth-Generation model addresses some of those concerns, particularly with the new exterior styling. Toyota is going to move a ton of these just on the new exterior alone. And, shortcomings or not, it will be a pretty same investment, considering the generally Better-than-Average reliability record of most Toyota products and the low depreciation the the average RAV-4 is likely to lose at trade-in or re-sale time.
But, also, don't overlook the fact that the RAV-4 also has a number of credible competitors....my brother, for instance, has had two Kia Sportages and loved both of them. The Honda CR-V, though not quite to the RAV-4's enormous sales level, was once, itself, the top-selling SUV in the U.S., and still goes out the door in big numbers. And, the Mazda CX-5, though, with an (IMO) annoying warning-light system on the dash that omits a engine-temperature gauge, has a reputation, like most Mazda products for being driver-focused in the chassis/underpinnings and driver-involvement level, for those of you into that sort of thing. So, yes, the new RAV-4, especially in upper-trim versions, is probably worthy of your automotive $$$$$$....but so are a number of its credible competitors.
And, as always......Happy Car-Shopping, and Happy Holiday Season.
Nice review MM as always. Did you happen to notice the build country (Canada or Japan?) of the RAV4 you saw and whether you noticed the same fit/quality issues as Jill did?
Also, Toyota has also cheaped out on base Camrys with cheaper hard plastics vs the higher trim versions' softer touches. Seems to be the new trend for Toyota. Not sure what the 2020 Corolla will get but wouldn't surprise me if the same strategy is applied.
Thanks. Took longer than I had originally planned, but Toyota took their time getting it to market, just in time for the Holidays.
Did you happen to notice the build country (Canada or Japan?) of the RAV4 you saw and whether you noticed the same fit/quality issues as Jill did?
I looked at several individual samples on the static-review (non-test-drive)...VINs from both Canada and Japan. Though I didn't check them with a microscope, I don't remember seeing any serious V-shaped panel-gaps where parallel lines should have been, like Jill did on the one she liked at. The only significant fit/finish slip I noticed was a loose-fitting glove box lid on one of them (I think it was the LE). I didn't write it up because the others seemed better, especially on the Limited, though Toyota does seem to have had a problem in recent years with Cracker-Jack glove box lids and latches. The ultra-lightweight hoods rattled and shook like a tin can when they shut...but the rest of body/sheet metal and trim was nice and solid, wth no problems.....even the plastic grilles felt relatively solid.
Perhaps the the worst defect I've seen on a new Toyota (which I've mentioned before), was actually on the C-HR, not the RAV-4. The first C-HR I looked at not only had a paper-thin glove box that would barely stay latched, even with nothing in it, but the whole lower-dash plastic trim-piece was seriously misaligned (even the tabs were sticking out)...to the point where the misaligned hole in it, cut out for the engine Start/Stop button, blocked about half of the the button itself. I tried to fix it myself (I sometimes can with small things), but couldn't do it, even with the few tools that I carry with me in the trunk.
Also, Toyota has also cheaped out on base Camrys with cheaper hard plastics vs the higher trim versions' softer touches. Seems to be the new trend for Toyota. Not sure what the 2020 Corolla will get but wouldn't surprise me if the same strategy is applied.
That seems to be one of the differences between Toyota and some other manufacturers. Toyota puts a lot of time and effort into what goes into the vehicle under the skin, but often skims on the stuff inside....the surfaces you see, touch, feel, and use. Other manufacturers (Audi is a good example) often give you nicer materials inside, but also give you less-reliable drivetrains and other components underneath.
Next planned reviews; 2019 Lexus UX, 2019 Ford Ranger. I've got a friend, checkbook ready, with a lot of interest in the Ranger.....looking to replace his old Ford Explorer Sport Trac.
Thank you for this MMarshall! I'm really considering getting one of these to replace my first gen daily driver Rav4. It has been absolutely the most reliable vehicle I have ever owned and she's still running great at 215,000 miles. I don't wanna cross the 100,000 mile mark on my GS so this so getting this new Rav4 is definitely in my calendar for January . First one that doesn't look feminine IMO. It took me awhile to get mine looking a little masculine, lol.
I'm really considering getting one of these to replace my first gen daily driver Rav4. It has been absolutely the most reliable vehicle I have ever owned and she's still running great at 215,000 miles.
Typical for Toyotas of that time period. You'll notice, in the OVERVIEW part of the write-up, I mentioned that I thought that Toyota did some of their best vehicles during the 1990s....particularly for the Celica, Camry and Avalon.
I don't wanna cross the 100,000 mile mark on my GS so this so getting this new Rav4 is definitely in my calendar for January.
There will undoubtedly be a lot of hoopla at the dealerships in January, as this is an all-new version of an extremely popular vehicle, always in high demand, but (probably) even more so in this case. Toyota obviously doesn't need many incentives or discounts to sell this vehicle, though it obviously also has a lot of tough competition....particularly with the Honda CR-V and Kia Sportage. If you really want one as a January Late-Holiday gift, then fine (and congratulations) ...but you might (?) get a little better deal after the initial hoopla wears off in a couple of months.
In either case (January or later), I'd strongly suggest checking out a Limited or one of the other upper-line models before signing on the dotted line for an LE or XLE....although you probably won't need the Adventure version's mild-off-road capability. I don't know the specifics of your budget (nor is it my buisness)....but I think you will probably find the higher-line versions worth the extra money. The LE may be great for keeping the cost down (mid-high 20s), and its higher-profile tires generally smooth out the bumps a little more, but the steel wheels add more unsprung weight under the suspension (which might nullify the effect of the easier-riding tires), and the LE interior, which only comes in all-black, has some real bargain-basement materials.
First one that doesn't look feminine IMO. It took me awhile to get mine looking a little masculine, lol.
I wouldn't necessarily call the last-generation model either masculine or feminine.....IMO just Frumpy-looking,. This one is definitely more substantial-looking, both inside and out....I certainly agree with that.
Nice review MM as always. Did you happen to notice the build country (Canada or Japan?) of the RAV4 you saw and whether you noticed the same fit/quality issues as Jill did?
Also, Toyota has also cheaped out on base Camrys with cheaper hard plastics vs the higher trim versions' softer touches. Seems to be the new trend for Toyota. Not sure what the 2020 Corolla will get but wouldn't surprise me if the same strategy is applied.
This has been the norm across non-luxury brands though, so not surprised that Toyota would also do this. I've a 2014 Fusion Titanium, 2012 Focus SE & 2013 Focus Titanium. Very noticeable difference in design, material quality, and more soft-touch materials rather than hard-touch. You typically need to look at luxury brands to find more consistency across trims. For example, look at a C-Class and you'll find regardless of which "trim" you choose, typically the "lowest" and "highest" will have the same materials & designs. Where they differ is just what features/options are present.
Also, @mmarshall, thank you for sharing. Great review!
Also, @mmarshall, thank you for sharing. Great review!
Glad you enjoyed it. And, if you want to see better reviews than mine, check out Alex (Dykes) videos from Alex on Autos. Despite a rather monotonous droning voice, that guy knows his stuff. He covers every square inch of the vehicle between the front and rear bumpers....nothing gets by him.
This has been the norm across non-luxury brands though, so not surprised that Toyota would also do this. I've a 2014 Fusion Titanium, 2012 Focus SE & 2013 Focus Titanium. Very noticeable difference in design, material quality, and more soft-touch materials rather than hard-touch.
A quirk with the older Fusion marketing, though (and its trim-levels) is that, until Mercury was axed, the Fusion had to fit in with not only the top-line Lincoln MKZ version of it, but the somewhat less-upmarket Mercury Milan. There were essentially three different brands of the same vehicle, under three different nameplates....and all the different individual trim-levels as well. Now, of course, you have only the Fusion and MKZ left.....and the MKZ and Fusion are now even further apart in their interiors and general trim-level. Unfortunately, thanks to the Ford Bean-Counters and their obsession with getting rid of sedans, soon even both of THEM could likely be gone, too, from the American market.
Nice review....was interested in reading your follow up after Jill's thread. This is the first RAV-4 that hasn't been ugly IMO. Toyota has really stepped up their design game the last few years.
I look forward to your Ranger review. So far everything I've read and watched from the auto press has been very positive.
Nice review....was interested in reading your follow up after Jill's thread.
Thanks...Took longer than I was hoping for, because of Toyota's delay in getting them to market.
This is the first RAV-4 that hasn't been ugly IMO. Toyota has really stepped up their design game the last few years
I thought the 1Gen two-door was probably the goofiest-looking one, though the 1Gen had more durable interior materials than subsequent versions. The two-doors were popular on the West Coast, but very few of them were sold here around D.C.
I look forward to your Ranger review. So far everything I've read and watched from the auto press has been very positive.
From what I understand, though, it is not an all-new design. It has been sold (with right-hand-drive) in Australia for years.
Ford just released the Ranger Build-Your-Own feature, wth pricing, on its web-site.....I posted that in a separate thread.
Great review, more thorough than your other recent ones perhaps, thanks for taking the time.
Thanks....glad you liked it. The Holiday Review is my feature review each year......also had a number of requests for it. Though I am certainly not in his league by any means, I try to give it at least a little dab of King Alex's touch.
Given the rate at which the RAV-4 sells, I suspect we'll be getting some experience/input from a number of new owners/leasees here at CL in the new few months.
Going to do the Lexus UX and Ford Ranger, BTW, as soon as they are available. The first UX models are just starting to trickle in now, very slowly, but I'm going to be tied up with Christmas over the next few days.
CX5 and the RAV coming from the same styling aesthetic is a big stretch. Rather, Toyota wants you to see the 4Runner when you look at a RAV. The 4Runner and its rugged reputation based on toughnes and off road prowess... while you head over to the grocery store or the mall. It's a way of distancing the RAV from its staid city commuter-scooter, granma's bingo-shuttle image.
This is what Toyota likely would like RAV buyers to see.
12-20-18, 07:20 PM
MM Annual Holiday Full-Review: 2019 Toyota RAV-4
