Topic: Test Drive: 2015 Toyota RAV4 AWD Limited

[Autos_Editor]

A sensible-shoes entry in a crowded and popular segment.
Read More...

[Rupert]

   If recent reports have taught me anything, it would be that when it comes to styling...less is more. The styling on this vehicle is super, to my eye anyway. Love the side view and 3/4 rear. The absence of major flare and creasing is a joy that brings appreciation for the overall shape...nice. Perhaps the stylist studied at the Audi School...maybe more should.
   More engine choices do not necessarily make a model better...maybe non of them would be quite right and all need procedure to accommodate. This one seems to be just fine from the report. I'm not going to meet anyone on the track...hmmm...or even off the road for that matter. Unless an error of judgement or dire need for avoidance raise their ugly heads. I may never be a customer in this sphere but who knows...down the road...minds can be changed. Nice to see that just FWD can be ones choice but I also note that AWD only engages when the situation requires. I don't follow these things closely so maybe this last feature is the norm these days. Nice big speedo on the centreline of the steering wheel and it looks like a reachable passenger ledge that might hold a pair of driving gloves. Little things like the latter are not noticed much except by their absence. Flat rear seat backs when folded...the step is fine. Altogether a nicely rounded vehicle. Is it me or do some aspects resemble a Volvo.

[Danno001]

Just dropped off the Venza for service and was shuttled to work in a 2014 RAV4 XLE. Solid CUV, comfortable, soaked up the bumps nicely. Definitely a candidate for next vehicle in our fleet.

[Noto]

Simon, nice review...you got a LOT of basic information across in a very reasonable amount of space.  Hint, hint, Jeff Voth.  I like that you paid particular attention to the details that consumers are likely to notice over ownership, but not necessarily during a test-drive.  How thoughtful of you

Unfortunately it’s not really an option to leave the transmission in Sport mode because it then reverts to Normal mode on restart. Eco mode, on the other hand,
...
This netted me fuel consumption of about 11.5 L/100 km in the city and 9.3 L/100 km on the highway

Yeah, I still have this complaint of Subaru's SI-drive; if I want to drive my vehicle a particular way, it should be a set-it-and-forget-it affair.  Don't bullsh!t me about "oh, bad for the car to run in Sport# or Sport mode when the engine is cold"...I don't buy it, and flooring it in "Eco" mode when you just start the car isn't nice for the engine either, but it's not disabled.

In any event, I'm thoroughly unimpressed by the fuel economy figures, given what pretty much all of the competitors are showing.  9.3L/100km on the highway...I mean, sh!t, my RX400h (hybrids are better in cities, not highways...) gets better than that on the highway with winter tires and it weighs >4,500lbs and has 268hp.  Come to think of it, even the RX350 does better. 

It's funny, though...everyone hates CVTs, and yet Toyota retained a 6-speed autobox.  Still, the comments are "it shifts indecisively" and "fuel economy isn't great".  Now that CVTs don't moooooo as much (or at all), I think it's time for some positive adoption.

One shortcoming compared to the Honda CR-V is that there’s no seatback releases within reach of the hatch, so you have to go around and open the rear doors in order to fold the seats (and you also have to remove the rear headrests unless the front seats are adjusted well forward).

Funny how the Rav4 used to (prior to 2013) have remote releases for the rear seats in the trunk and they could slide along rails fore-aft for greater legroom or cargo flexibility.  I can't believe Toyota got rid of that function...it downright pissed me off.

And it has to be said...the exterior styling is just downright awful.  It looks kind of batty, but not batman style...more like:


 

[redman]

   If recent reports have taught me anything, it would be that when it comes to styling...less is more. The styling on this vehicle is super, to my eye anyway. Love the side view and 3/4 rear. The absence of major flare and creasing is a joy that brings appreciation for the overall shape...nice. Perhaps the stylist studied at the Audi School...maybe more should.
   More engine choices do not necessarily make a model better...maybe non of them would be quite right and all need procedure to accommodate. This one seems to be just fine from the report. I'm not going to meet anyone on the track...hmmm...or even off the road for that matter. Unless an error of judgement or dire need for avoidance raise their ugly heads. I may never be a customer in this sphere but who knows...down the road...minds can be changed. Nice to see that just FWD can be ones choice but I also note that AWD only engages when the situation requires. I don't follow these things closely so maybe this last feature is the norm these days. Nice big speedo on the centreline of the steering wheel and it looks like a reachable passenger ledge that might hold a pair of driving gloves. Little things like the latter are not noticed much except by their absence. Flat rear seat backs when folded...the step is fine. Altogether a nicely rounded vehicle. Is it me or do some aspects resemble a Volvo.

Styling is truly subjective. In our recent SUV purchase the new Rav4 was not even on our radar simply based on it's styling. We are not fans of either the front fat bottom lip or protruding angled rear of the vehicle.

[drive67]

Toyota has a diesel in the Rav4 which they sell all around the world with fuel economy of 5.6L manual and 6.5 automatic why can't you get it north America? VW has proven that diesel sell in North America and I would bet they would have a hard time keeping them in stock. The 2.2L would also be a good fit in the Tacoma. Toyota is very slow bringing new product to the North American  market and when they do it seems  old already.

[johngenx]

My "perfect" RAV would be the exterior of the previous model, but with the proper hatchback of the current one, the current interior, a diesel or hybrid driveline, and the full time AWD of the 01-05 models.  Too bad they're not made of Lego!!

[random006]

My "perfect" RAV would be the exterior of the previous model, but with the proper hatchback of the current one, the current interior, a diesel or hybrid driveline, and the full time AWD of the 01-05 models.  Too bad they're not made of Lego!!

Yeah, because that would be ... Awesome!  (Apologies to those who only just now got that irritating song out of their heads).    

Oh and btw, John,  I do agree with the driveline and AWD.

[ltruong]

Toyota has a diesel in the Rav4 which they sell all around the world with fuel economy of 5.6L manual and 6.5 automatic why can't you get it north America? VW has proven that diesel sell in North America and I would bet they would have a hard time keeping them in stock. The 2.2L would also be a good fit in the Tacoma. Toyota is very slow bringing new product to the North American  market and when they do it seems  old already.

You are going into Unicorn land..  Subaru outback/forester 2.0 Diesel, Rav4, Tiguan, CX5, Frontier, Colorado, VW amarok, Accord..... all Unicorns in NA. 

[PJAvenger]

Just finished renting one of these for a week, and couldn't help but think of this quote:

Mr. Anchovy: Exciting?! No, it's not! It's dull! Dull, dull, my God it's dull! It's so dull and tedious and stuffy and boring and desperately dull!

[ThePointblank]

One shortcoming compared to the Honda CR-V is that there’s no seatback releases within reach of the hatch, so you have to go around and open the rear doors in order to fold the seats (and you also have to remove the rear headrests unless the front seats are adjusted well forward).

Funny how the Rav4 used to (prior to 2013) have remote releases for the rear seats in the trunk and they could slide along rails fore-aft for greater legroom or cargo flexibility.  I can't believe Toyota got rid of that function...it downright pissed me off.

I spoke to a Toyota rep at the RAV4's launch event a while back when I noticed that the rear seats could not slide forward and back. The rep said that it wasn't a feature that was desired or used all that often according to the studies and surveys they conducted.

[Snowman]

One shortcoming compared to the Honda CR-V is that there’s no seatback releases within reach of the hatch, so you have to go around and open the rear doors in order to fold the seats (and you also have to remove the rear headrests unless the front seats are adjusted well forward).

Funny how the Rav4 used to (prior to 2013) have remote releases for the rear seats in the trunk and they could slide along rails fore-aft for greater legroom or cargo flexibility.  I can't believe Toyota got rid of that function...it downright pissed me off.

I spoke to a Toyota rep at the RAV4's launch event a while back when I noticed that the rear seats could not slide forward and back. The rep said that it wasn't a feature that was desired or used all that often according to the studies and surveys they conducted.

Interesting, for me that is a great feature.

[rrocket]

Just finished renting one of these for a week, and couldn't help but think of this quote:

Mr. Anchovy: Exciting?! No, it's not! It's dull! Dull, dull, my God it's dull! It's so dull and tedious and stuffy and boring and desperately dull!

I find this to be the case for ALL CUVs...

[johngenx]

I find this to be the case for ALL CUVs...

Pretty much.  The old manual trans Forester XT was reasonably fun.  The vast majority of CUVs sold are normally aspirated four cylinder models with automatics (not many even offer DIY shifting anymore) and are pretty bland.  Utilitarian, indeed, but bland.

[rrocket]

I find this to be the case for ALL CUVs...

Pretty much.  The old manual trans Forester XT was reasonably fun.  The vast majority of CUVs sold are normally aspirated four cylinder models with automatics (not many even offer DIY shifting anymore) and are pretty bland.  Utilitarian, indeed, but bland.

I even have a 5 speed manual in my Forester and it's still boring as $hit...

[Rupert]

  Cherokee also? Well it sounds like they hit the right spot for usage. Conservative road use with a bit of extra AW go for inclement weather. Maybe a close ratio gearbox and racing clutch would be out of place.
  The words "practical", "dependable", "value", probably should reside here. Probably the things they are bought for anyway...with a hint of toughness (real or not so)

[Noto]

I spoke to a Toyota rep at the RAV4's launch event a while back when I noticed that the rear seats could not slide forward and back. The rep said that it wasn't a feature that was desired or used all that often according to the studies and surveys they conducted.

I use it ALL the time in my RX400h.  Luggage?  Winter tires?  minifridge (our office is moving, so I took my mini bar fridge home in the interim...wouldn't fit in the corolla, too tall to stand up in the RX, and trunk too shallow (normally) to slide it in sideways.  Slide seats forward a bit, which is fine given I have no passengers, and voila, fridge fits.

Man, Toyota must be asking some narrow-minded folk...

[mixmanmash]

I find this to be the case for ALL CUVs...

Pretty much.  The old manual trans Forester XT was reasonably fun.  The vast majority of CUVs sold are normally aspirated four cylinder models with automatics (not many even offer DIY shifting anymore) and are pretty bland.  Utilitarian, indeed, but bland.

I even have a 5 speed manual in my Forester and it's still boring as $hit...

Compared to a 911 or a Supra, you bet.

I thought the old Forester XT with manuals were a bit of a hoot...  For a CUV/SUV.

[LoveToDrive]

I've said it in previous reviews of the RAV4 .  Nice CUV in most respects and I almost bought one.    Then I happened to notice how narrow the back seat is.  I'm not talking about back seat leg room, which is pretty good.  I'm referring to the fact that it is not very wide.  You'd be hard pressed to put 3 adults or even 3 kids together in that seat.   For me, it meant that the car is more a four seater than five.   The CRV was much better in that respect.

[pi314]

I spoke to a Toyota rep at the RAV4's launch event a while back when I noticed that the rear seats could not slide forward and back. The rep said that it wasn't a feature that was desired or used all that often according to the studies and surveys they conducted.

I use it ALL the time in my RX400h.  Luggage?  Winter tires?  minifridge (our office is moving, so I took my mini bar fridge home in the interim...wouldn't fit in the corolla, too tall to stand up in the RX, and trunk too shallow (normally) to slide it in sideways.  Slide seats forward a bit, which is fine given I have no passengers, and voila, fridge fits.

Man, Toyota must be asking some narrow-minded folk...

If you had no rear passengers couldn't you just fold the seats?