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.
With my kids still in car seats moving those to the back is too big a PITA for a trip out to dinner, etc. When we go to the beach and my mom is with us the whole time we do put them back there and drop one of the middle row seats into the stow n go and she sits in the other one.
If we are just going out for dinner with additional guests (as opposed to numerous trips, like when my in-laws stay with us for a week), we usually just put my daughter in the way back, as she has a simple booster, and then an adult sits back there with her, leaving my son (full car seat) and an adult in the second row. But my boy is, thankfully, very close to graduating up to a booster seat. And when that happens, I'm going to sing and dance and be giddy.
I saw one on the road last night for the first time, and wow, it's MUCH smaller in person than the marketing photos make it out to be. Very similar profile to the XC90 IMO.
Its not odd if Toyota adds a larger cross over such as the GLS size of a Mercedes and calls it a Sequoia. The new Highlander has the same interior measurements as the CX9.
Originally Posted by SW17LS
Good example is the Mazda CX-9.Love the vehicle, it looks great, drives great...but its just too small. Its really a 2 row vehicle that has an "emergency" third row. Perhaps thats what Toyota is after too, but I think thats the wrong approach
You often praise the Mazda products over Toyota. You have done it with Corolla, and Camry where you would rather have the Mazda products. Yet here is a situation where Toyota makes a better drivers car (based on assumption). The Hyundai models will not be best in class drivers cars.
It does make sense if you look what Toyota is after. They are not after the person who wants 10 more cubic feet of space, and a competitive Hyundai like price. They are after those who want driving dynamics, and a sleek or modern new looks. That is where the industry in cross-overs is headed, Toyota has downsized the Corolla, Corolla hatch, RAV4, Avalon, LS500, offered a smaller UX, and now they are making the Highlander, longer, more tapered but with less cubic feet (from the rear roof)....all of the mentioned ride better, handle better, and finally get better reviews as per dynamics and looks than ever before. This is how they can continue to charge more money than their direct competition...and they are hoping people will pay for these attributes. Eventually, if space is the problem and you truly "need" more than 73 cubic feet of space, you upsize to a new Sequoia cross-over or whatever Lexus version they are selling...
Dont think this applies to SUVs/CUVs. The RAV4 grew both inside and out and same with the Highlander, though admittedly the HL isn't as big as I would have liked. Toyota purposely made their cars lower and sportier to attract attention and differentiate themselves.
The RAV4 grew both inside and out and same with the Highlander,.
2019 RAV4 has less cubic feet total than the 2018. If you research the 2018 and 2019, the 2018 has 3.5 more cubic feet of room with all seats down. Is the 3.5 inches longer than the 18 but has a shorter wheelbase. Its the tapering off of the roof that is making the difference.. Legroom and headroom for the 19 is down in the front over the 18
I saw one on the road last night for the first time, and wow, it's MUCH smaller in person than the marketing photos make it out to be. Very similar profile to the XC90 IMO.
Thats about right, its less than 2 inches longer than an XC90.
Originally Posted by LexsCTJill
Its not odd if Toyota adds a larger cross over such as the GLS size of a Mercedes and calls it a Sequoia. The new Highlander has the same interior measurements as the CX9.
It would have to be more expensive than the Highlander which would put it in another class. Loaded Highlander is $50k, loaded Palisade is $47k. I'm not looking for a $60k vehicle here. $50k loaded is this 2 row mainstream class, similar to minivans.
You often praise the Mazda products over Toyota. You have done it with Corolla, and Camry where you would rather have the Mazda products. Yet here is a situation where Toyota makes a better drivers car (based on assumption). The Hyundai models will not be best in class drivers cars.
I think thats a big assumption. If you drive the CX-9 its heads and shoulders a better driving car than anything current in the class, but its too small for family duty IMHO, if the new Highlander is similar in size, its too small. For the new Highlander to be a better driving vehicle than the CX-9 it would have to be several orders of magnitude better than the outgoing Highlander, which I doubt.
Hyundai models may not be best in class driving vehicles, but they have the space. Its all a tradeoff. I just want a nice driving quality feeling 3 row crossover with plenty of room inside, thats all anybody in this segment really wants.
If we are just going out for dinner with additional guests (as opposed to numerous trips, like when my in-laws stay with us for a week), we usually just put my daughter in the way back, as she has a simple booster, and then an adult sits back there with her, leaving my son (full car seat) and an adult in the second row. But my boy is, thankfully, very close to graduating up to a booster seat. And when that happens, I'm going to sing and dance and be giddy.
I have 4 year old twins, so they graduate from each seat type together lol
Thats about right, its less than 2 inches longer than an XC90.
Loaded Highlander is $50k, loaded Palisade is $47k. I'm not looking for a $60k vehicle here. $50k loaded is this 2 row mainstream class, similar to minivans.
This next gen Highlander will be more than $50K at the top end.
Originally Posted by SW17LS
I just want a nice driving quality feeling 3 row crossover with plenty of room inside, thats all anybody in this segment really wants.
So they you buy the Hyundai for less than the Toyota. I said early, that it appears you are not the demographic Toyota is going for on the next generation Highlander.
Originally Posted by SW17LS
It would have to be more expensive than the Highlander which would put it in another class.
Of course it would. Toyota has raised its top end prices across the board. If you want a Toyota, you will pay premium for it over a Hyundai or KIA. Toyota will be hoping existing Highlander owners will step up to a larger cross over that will likely be built in the same plant in Indiana as the Highlander. Toyota also wants to appeal to those buying Explorers and other models at a higher price point.
This is just my speculation. But I can’t see Toyota offering a new gen Sequoia from a BOF design.
I think thats a big assumption. If you drive the CX-9 its heads and shoulders a better driving car than anything current in the class, but its too small for family duty IMHO, if the new Highlander is similar in size, its too small. For the new Highlander to be a better driving vehicle than the CX-9 it would have to be several orders of magnitude better than the outgoing Highlander, which I doubt.
I drove a CX-5 Signature back to back with a Honda CR-V Touring. The CX-5 was, hands down, a nicer, cabin, with better quality materials, and many more features. My wife is not into cars in the least, and in the middle of the Honda test drive volunteered, without me prompting, "This just isn't as nice at all." This is the current Mazda mantra.
This next gen Highlander will be more than $50K at the top end.
So they you buy the Hyundai for less than the Toyota. I said early, that it appears you are not the demographic Toyota is going for on the next generation Highlander.
Of course it would. Toyota has raised its top end prices across the board. If you want a Toyota, you will pay premium for it over a Hyundai or KIA. Toyota will be hoping existing Highlander owners will step up to a larger cross over that will likely be built in the same plant in Indiana as the Highlander. Toyota also wants to appeal to those buying Explorers and other models at a higher price point.
This is just my speculation. But I can’t see Toyota offering a new gen Sequoia from a BOF design.
What car company doesn't raise prices across the board when the new generation comes out?
Look at the new RAV4; a loaded version is almost $40K. Is the RAV4 now in a different class than a CR-V? Of course not. Just because the Highlander is creeping up in price doesn't put it in "another" class. The fact is, most Highlanders and RAV4s I see are LE or XLE; not nearly as many Limiteds. So the bulk of buyers aren't paying that top end price anyway.
No doubt that a Toyota model will cost more than the Kia or Hyundai direct competitor. But that's because of the pricing of Hyundai and Kia, not the Toyota pricing. Toyota still feels that they can command a price on the higher end of the class; I don't think they are wrong.
It does make sense if you look what Toyota is after. They are not after the person who wants 10 more cubic feet of space, and a competitive Hyundai like price. They are after those who want driving dynamics, and a sleek or modern new looks. That is where the industry in cross-overs is headed,
What do you base the bold part on except for the new highlander? Maybe the explorer too?
There’s also another huge seller, the Honda Pilot... which is hardly sleek and isn’t about driving dynamics either. I read this earlier, which is a good comparison of pilot vs palisade.
Toyota has downsized the Corolla, Corolla hatch, RAV4, Avalon, LS500, offered a smaller UX, and now they are making the Highlander, longer, more tapered but with less cubic feet (from the rear roof)....all of the mentioned ride better, handle better, and finally get better reviews as per dynamics and looks than ever before. This is how they can continue to charge more money than their direct competition...and they are hoping people will pay for these attributes. Eventually, if space is the problem and you truly "need" more than 73 cubic feet of space, you upsize to a new Sequoia cross-over or whatever Lexus version they are selling...
Except there’s no evidence a new sequoia crossover is coming any time soon that i’ve seen.
Anyway, i expect the new highlander to do well, it’s good looking and a nice improvement in several ways to the current one.
i also believe hyundai having 2 bites at the apple (with kia telluride too) is going to do well. You can keep putting them down as the lesser/cheaper ones with worse handling (a claim i’ve not heard anyway, any maybe doesn’t matter either), but the reviews of both are EXTREMELY positive.
Plus, as i started this thread with, the h/k duo have a head start over the ‘20 highlander, and i believe they WILL put a sizable dent in ‘19 highlander sales.
Originally Posted by SW17LS
I think thats a big assumption. If you drive the CX-9 its heads and shoulders a better driving car than anything current in the class, but its too small for family duty IMHO, if the new Highlander is similar in size, its too small. For the new Highlander to be a better driving vehicle than the CX-9 it would have to be several orders of magnitude better than the outgoing Highlander, which I doubt.
Originally Posted by tex2670
I drove a CX-5 Signature back to back with a Honda CR-V Touring. The CX-5 was, hands down, a nicer, cabin, with better quality materials, and many more features. My wife is not into cars in the least, and in the middle of the Honda test drive volunteered, without me prompting, "This just isn't as nice at all." This is the current Mazda mantra.
Anyone in the auto press will tell you that if you drive a Mazda against any competitor, you'd be likely to buy unless your absolute priority is the most space possible. They'd be a best selling brand, yet they continue to be overlooked by a large portion of the buying public. Everyone has their reasons and that's cool.
A lot of people point to the lesser space of the CX-9 and IMO it's overstated. The idea that it can't be a "family hauler" is silly. How can any vehicle that carries 7 people not be any good as a family hauler when sedans did the job with bigger families for decades? I'm 6'1 250 and have ridden in the 3rd row. In fact, a 6 footer can sit in all 3-rows in line.
The current CX-9 has more 2nd and 3rd seat legroom than the current Highlander as well as more space behind the 3rd row. No one says the Highlander is impractical. It's only total cargo space where the CX-9's numbers suffer but that's only when you fill your vehicle to the ceiling. How often do people do this? I've taken mine across country and took a huge amount of stuff with the family. I've also never once folded the 2nd row in order to fill up the whole cargo area so those numbers are largely useless and I bet most people almost never do it either. You buy 3-rows to haul people, at least to the 2nd row. If you wanted a big box area, you'd own a truck.
Looking at the specs of the new Highlander puts it right in line with the CX-9's interior dimensions. A very curious move by Toyota when that's the main complaint about the Mazda. But I know tons of buyers will excuse it and still buy in droves. At least with Mazda, the smaller dimensions lend themselves to Mazda's focus on driving dynamics so they aren't built too boxy and top heavy.
I'm also curious that people are surprised to learn that the Telluride and Pallisade aren't the massive vehicles that pictures apparently make them look. I always take a look at dimensions in vehicles of interest. That would make people aware that these are shorter than the "small" CX-9. They are just boxier.
Anyone in the auto press will tell you that if you drive a Mazda against any competitor, you'd be likely to buy unless your absolute priority is the most space possible. They'd be a best selling brand, yet they continue to be overlooked by a large portion of the buying public. Everyone has their reasons and that's cool.
A lot of people point to the lesser space of the CX-9 and IMO it's overstated. The idea that it can't be a "family hauler" is silly. How can any vehicle that carries 7 people not be any good as a family hauler when sedans did the job with bigger families for decades? I'm 6'1 250 and have ridden in the 3rd row. In fact, a 6 footer can sit in all 3-rows in line.
The current CX-9 has more 2nd and 3rd seat legroom than the current Highlander as well as more space behind the 3rd row. No one says the Highlander is impractical. It's only total cargo space where the CX-9's numbers suffer but that's only when you fill your vehicle to the ceiling. How often do people do this? I've taken mine across country and took a huge amount of stuff with the family. I've also never once folded the 2nd row in order to fill up the whole cargo area so those numbers are largely useless and I bet most people almost never do it either. You buy 3-rows to haul people, at least to the 2nd row. If you wanted a big box area, you'd own a truck.
Looking at the specs of the new Highlander puts it right in line with the CX-9's interior dimensions. A very curious move by Toyota when that's the main complaint about the Mazda. But I know tons of buyers will excuse it and still buy in droves. At least with Mazda, the smaller dimensions lend themselves to Mazda's focus on driving dynamics so they aren't built too boxy and top heavy.
I'm also curious that people are surprised to learn that the Telluride and Pallisade aren't the massive vehicles that pictures apparently make them look. I always take a look at dimensions in vehicles of interest. That would make people aware that these are shorter than the "small" CX-9. They are just boxier.
This an excellent post. As for the last part, the Pallisade and Telluride look more like traditional SUVs than they do cross overs which seem to becoming more and more sleek.
I'm a facts and numbers guy, so I put together this quick dimensional comparison. It surprised me that the CX-9 has the longest wheelbase and the longest length. I had to use the outgoing Highlander because Toyota has not released the full specs (that I can find) on the new model. I highlighted in green which vehicle has the largest dimension in each category.
2019 RAV4 has less cubic feet total than the 2018. If you research the 2018 and 2019, the 2018 has 3.5 more cubic feet of room with all seats down. Is the 3.5 inches longer than the 18 but has a shorter wheelbase. Its the tapering off of the roof that is making the difference.. Legroom and headroom for the 19 is down in the front over the 18
Just took another look and you are right, 2019 is more in some areas and less in others, however it is still not the dramatic size reduction as seen in their newer sedans but smaller is smaller no doubt.
07-01-19, 08:17 AM
