You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Toyota RAV4 review: Disappointing economy, stodgy handling, and forgettable looks
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
disinterested_observer
Wise, Aged Ars Veteran
Oh hi Al.
Nice to see you're on ars now. Saves me visiting your old place unless for some reason I want to be evangelized to about storage or bloody devops.
Nice to see you're on ars now. Saves me visiting your old place unless for some reason I want to be evangelized to about storage or bloody devops.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
That just about sums up every Toyota over the last few years. The only Toyota that isn't utterly boring is the GT86, and that's because Subaru worked on that car significantly as well.Disappointing economy, stodgy handling, and forgettable looks
Compact SUVs are ridiculously popular in the UK, with Nissan's Qashqai posting big sales figures. Meanwhile the RAV4 is hardly seen anywhere.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
[url=http://arstechnica.co.uk/civis/viewtopic.php?p=30787513#p30787513:284voe4n said:r3loaded[/url]":284voe4n]That just about sums up every Toyota over the last few years. The only Toyota that isn't utterly boring is the GT86, and that's because Subaru worked on that car significantly as well.Disappointing economy, stodgy handling, and forgettable looks
Compact SUVs are ridiculously popular in the UK, with Nissan's Qashqai posting big sales figures. Meanwhile the RAV4 is hardly seen anywhere.
But... it's called the Qashqai. I mean, how do you even pronounce that?!
But yeah, those CUV things are really popular here. Can hardly move for Evoques and BMW X3s.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
4wd and petrol? Thats pretty unusual.
I've been looking at Crossovers, but I wanted 4wd (because on the occasions it does snow I often have to drive up and down un-gritted hills) and a Petrol engine (because the number of miles I do overall isn't particularly DPF friendly, and as far as I could see no one makes them besides Volvo with the XC-?0 T6 variants.
I've been looking at Crossovers, but I wanted 4wd (because on the occasions it does snow I often have to drive up and down un-gritted hills) and a Petrol engine (because the number of miles I do overall isn't particularly DPF friendly, and as far as I could see no one makes them besides Volvo with the XC-?0 T6 variants.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
passivesmoking
Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
So I guess RAV stands for Really Average Vehicle.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Personally I'm very willing to take "forgettable" if it is reliable (and that's not even touching on how eye-catching designs can be that reason because their just so weird/ugly - Juke, I'm looking at you). The mediocre efficiency and handling are more troubling.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Mister Fishfinger
Seniorius Lurkius
I've got an old 2007 RAV4 diesel and nothing in this review suggests that I should upgrade. Compared to mine, the new one is uglier, thirstier, faster accelerating and has about the same top speed (which is irrelevant anyway). They are both about the same size, mine has fewer toys but probably costs less to service.
It seems that Toyota has applied an awful lot of technology to make very little tangible improvement, although to be fair the hybrid model doesn't emit nasty particulates like my old clunker.
Overall, I'm underwhelmed.
It seems that Toyota has applied an awful lot of technology to make very little tangible improvement, although to be fair the hybrid model doesn't emit nasty particulates like my old clunker.
Overall, I'm underwhelmed.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
This seems to be more a marketing exercise than anything to me.
The conventional diesel is more economic, the petrol engine is not far away and is lighter and has more boot space and the performance and economy is not too far off. It looks like the emissions are very similar too.
This has a bigger engine, is vastly more complex, comes with a frankly unlovable CVT, terrible EV range / abilities and has a smaller tank and boot space.
I simply have no idea why anyone would buy this, surely it is way better to buy the diesel one and replace the diesel badge with a Hybrid one, save £3k on the purchase and enjoy the greater economy ?
Utterly, utterly pointless....
The conventional diesel is more economic, the petrol engine is not far away and is lighter and has more boot space and the performance and economy is not too far off. It looks like the emissions are very similar too.
This has a bigger engine, is vastly more complex, comes with a frankly unlovable CVT, terrible EV range / abilities and has a smaller tank and boot space.
I simply have no idea why anyone would buy this, surely it is way better to buy the diesel one and replace the diesel badge with a Hybrid one, save £3k on the purchase and enjoy the greater economy ?
Utterly, utterly pointless....
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Otispunkmeyer
Wise, Aged Ars Veteran
Small correction I think regarding the engine:
The author notes:
"That drivetrain consists of a 16-valve DOHC 2.5L 4-cylinder Atkinson cycle petrol engine (that’s one with a variable length piston stroke, and delayed intake valve closing to increase efficiency)"
No, the engine doesn't have variable length piston stroke. The stroke is the stroke and its 98 mm.
What the Atkinson cycle version of this engine has is different piston crowns and a different valve timing. The piston changes mean the geometrical compression ratio is actually higher than the base (non-Atkinson) engine (but the stroke is the same, Mazda do similar with their Skyactiv G engines to hit 14:1 compression). But the timing, which as is correctly stated is late intake closing, is what reduces the effective length of the compression stroke by allowing charge to be pushed back out into the manifold rather than compressed (i.e. work in). The expansion is thus bigger than the compression and hence, efficiency increases. Trouble is it normally results in a weaker engine from a torque point of view (because you have less air-fuel charge in the cylinder). But that is obviously not much of a concern in an a hybrid vehicle where you have a nice electric motor to fill in for you.
As for the rest of the car. Seems like standard Toyota these days. Oddly bland looks, completely inert to drive and nothing special in the performance and economy stakes. Their Hybrid drive is a good piece of engineering, but it really only shines in the Prius which is designed to be eco. Fitting it to a barn door like a Rav 4 means its a bit out of place and fitting AWD is daft too. 95% of the time its just added weight to cart around.
The author notes:
"That drivetrain consists of a 16-valve DOHC 2.5L 4-cylinder Atkinson cycle petrol engine (that’s one with a variable length piston stroke, and delayed intake valve closing to increase efficiency)"
No, the engine doesn't have variable length piston stroke. The stroke is the stroke and its 98 mm.
What the Atkinson cycle version of this engine has is different piston crowns and a different valve timing. The piston changes mean the geometrical compression ratio is actually higher than the base (non-Atkinson) engine (but the stroke is the same, Mazda do similar with their Skyactiv G engines to hit 14:1 compression). But the timing, which as is correctly stated is late intake closing, is what reduces the effective length of the compression stroke by allowing charge to be pushed back out into the manifold rather than compressed (i.e. work in). The expansion is thus bigger than the compression and hence, efficiency increases. Trouble is it normally results in a weaker engine from a torque point of view (because you have less air-fuel charge in the cylinder). But that is obviously not much of a concern in an a hybrid vehicle where you have a nice electric motor to fill in for you.
As for the rest of the car. Seems like standard Toyota these days. Oddly bland looks, completely inert to drive and nothing special in the performance and economy stakes. Their Hybrid drive is a good piece of engineering, but it really only shines in the Prius which is designed to be eco. Fitting it to a barn door like a Rav 4 means its a bit out of place and fitting AWD is daft too. 95% of the time its just added weight to cart around.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Otispunkmeyer
Wise, Aged Ars Veteran
[url=http://arstechnica.co.uk/civis/viewtopic.php?p=30793161#p30793161:ettm36hb said:fragile[/url]":ettm36hb]This seems to be more a marketing exercise than anything to me.
The conventional diesel is more economic, the petrol engine is not far away and is lighter and has more boot space and the performance and economy is not too far off. It looks like the emissions are very similar too.
This has a bigger engine, is vastly more complex, comes with a frankly unlovable CVT, terrible EV range / abilities and has a smaller tank and boot space.
I simply have no idea why anyone would buy this, surely it is way better to buy the diesel one and replace the diesel badge with a Hybrid one, save £3k on the purchase and enjoy the greater economy ?
Utterly, utterly pointless....
1) its not a CVT. Its a planatery drive system.
2) Hybrids aren't supposed to have much EV range. The motor is simply there for low speed manoeuver and torque in-fill. If you want EV range buy and EV or a plug-in Hybrid model.
3) Diesel really has no place in a passenger car. Trucks yes, because there is no way current EV tech will provide the kind of torque whilst also providing the range. They might emit a little less CO2, but depending on your POV, that isn't anything worry about unduly. More importantly and more immediately bad are the increased NOx and PM emissions.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
- Status
- Not open for further replies.