2007 RAV4

Over he Thanksgiving Holiday I had an opportunity to drive a 2007 RAV4 from Raleigh, NC to Columbia, SC and back. I thought I'd share my impressions.

This RAV4 I drove is a base four cylinder front wheel drive automatic transmission model with no significant options other than a radio upgrade and a distributor installed Park Pilot System.

Good stuff

- Size - I liked the size. Plenty of front and rear room, with good cargo room too.

- Seats - The rear seat folds flat, a big improvement over my old Vue.

- Seating room - Head and leg room were excellent. Rear seat room was good as well.

- Transmission - The transmission shifted flawlessly. Even though it was only a four speed, I never felt that it was in the wrong gear, or that I even needed another gear.

- Performance - The engine, although not particularly refined, was powerful. It accelerated briskly and had no problem cruising at 85 mph. There were only two of us in the vehicle for this trip, but I believe it would have been more than adequate even with a full load. The engine and transmission were well matched. I definitely felt that the engine/transmission combination was far superior to my old Vue and at least as good as my Sister's V-6 Escape (the transmission was definitely better). I doubt if the

4 cylinder RAV4 would outrun the V-6 Escape, but I don't care. The RAV4 four cylinder had very good performance. I am not sure I would pick the V-6 unless I need to tow something.

- Handling - Although the ride was not great, the handling was very good.

- Features - Even the base model had really good equipment - ABS, Electronic Limited Slip, Electronic Stability Control, Side Air Bags, Aux input for the audio system, power locks, power mirrors, power windows. My only complaint was that the vehicle did not come with floor mats.

- Steering - I have seen complaints about the steering, but I found it to be just fine.

- Fit and finish - The car was well assembled. Although the interior didn't look "expensive" it was properly assembled. There was not a squeak or a rattle anywhere.

- Routine Maintenance - All the items to be checked are readily available. The oil is easy to change. Only negative was the requirement for routine valve adjustment.

Bad Stuff

- Controls - For the first hour I drove the car I would have said the worst feature of the vehicle was the bizarre collection of controls. I don't think I have every gotten into a vehicle with a worse organized/designed collection of controls. The signaling controls, headlight controls, and wiper washer controls were on stalks and were fine. The radio was also fine. However, the HVAC controls were a train wreck. It is not that they were poorly located, it was that they were difficult to read, and the ridiculous outside wheel hiding the readings except in the little windows was unnecessarily complicated. I have never seen such a poor design. The shift lever was also needlessly weird. It is not just the little steeped gate I found offensive, it was the way you could easily select third instead of fourth. You may need to see one to understand, but to select 4th you pull the lever down through a series of steps at reverse and neutral. Once at fourth, you move the lever sideways (towards the driver) to select third. It is very easy to accidentally select third, particularly once you have been moving the lever side to side to get from park to fourth. I drove for ten miles in third before I realized I was in third. The outside power mirror controls were located on the center console, which seems silly. The control to dim the instrument panel light was off on the side of the dash where the mirror controls should have been. The door locks and windows controls were fine. The steering wheel position was too low, even though it had a tilt wheel. The cruise control controls were the worst I have ever seen. They are on a little stalk located low behind the steering wheel. but the stalk turns with the wheel. If Toyota was going to all the trouble of using a stalk for the controls, I don't understand why they didn't but them on a fixed stalk. After the first hour or so I got used to all this weirdness, and I assume if it was my car I'd get over the strangeness., but I don't think I'd ever think the HVAC controls were not stupid. In my opinion the person or persons responsible for these should be fired immediately. I assume they were designed by a graduate of an American design school. I can't imagine any other person who would do something so silly.

- Road noise - After getting over the controls, the actual worst feature of the car was the road noise. I was shocked by how noisy it was. My Nissan Frontier truck with all terrain tires is quieter on the highway than the RAV4 was. Both wind and road noise were excessive. It was far nosier than either my old 2003 Saturn Vue or my Sister's 2001 Ford Escape. I am sure part of the problem was the tires. They were very sensitive to changes in road surface, but they were never quiet. But even if the car had quiet tires, the wind noise was excessive.

- Ride - not as good as either my Vue or my sisters Escape. It was about on par with my Nissan pick-up. The handling of the RAV4 was better than the Vue, but not as good as the Escape.

- Engine noise - I constantly read about how sophisticated Toyota 4 cylinder engines are. I think they must be comparing them to lawn mowers. The engine was not as smooth as the 4 cylinder Ecotech in my old Vue at idle or cruise. When pushed hard it sounded like there was a mix master under the hood. I can't compare it to the Frontier or the Escape - they both have much smoother running six cylinder engines.

- Interior quality - the interior design was very reminiscent of my old Vue but, it was definitely a step above the Vue, about on par with my Nissan Frontier, and a step or two behind my Sister's Escape (but her Escape is an XLT model, the RAV4 is a base model). The interior was all plastic all the time, but at least it was properly assembled (something I wouldn't claim for the Vue).

- Seats - The seats were uncomfortable for a long drive (but they were more comfortable that the seats in the Frontier - even if they looked worse).

- Fuel economy - we averaged only a little over 21 mpg for the trip but I was driving fast (75+ on I40/I95/I20/I26). My Mom's old Grand Marquis got 25 mpg making the same trip. The vehicle only had around 4000 miles, so maybe it will improve with usage.

- Headlights - I found the headlight to be mediocre at best. They were the weakest I've used in a long time.

- Park Pilot System - This was worthless. I have had factory installed systems on other vehicles and they worked great. This distributor installed system was almost worthless.

- Rear Door - I'd prefer a lift gate over the RAV4 Door..

- Outside mounted spare tire. I have no idea why this is necessary. My old Vue and my Sister's Escape are both smaller but don't have a spare tire mounted on the rear door.

- Valve adjustment required - I can't imagine that Toyota is still selling engines that require routine valve adjustment. This is a procedure that cost hundreds of dollars. This is inexcusable.

All in all, I'd say the RAV4 was a better buy than a Vue and not as good as an Escape. The RAV4's larger size is an advantage, but I felt the Escape rode better, has much better controls, is quieter, and is significantly less expensive when comparably equipped. I know a lot of people would claim the RAV4 is more reliable, but I am not sure that reflects reality. My Sisters Escape is 6 years old and the only repair she has paid for was a new cruise control cable (I installed it) for a total cost of less than $12.

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White
Loading thread data ...

Check out the Honda CR-V. Got better safety ratings and no clunky spare tire on the back.

Reply to
D.D. Pallmer

I suspect that the gated shifter is an attempt to mimic the gated shifters in luxury cars.

. The outside power mirror

I also thought that the power mirror controls on the center console of our Sequoia was a poor location, however, I've noticed that they are easier for me to reach on the console while sitting in a driving position than the one on the dash, where I have to lean forward, make an adjustment, sit back, check, and re-adjust if necessary.

The door locks and windows controls were

I've hear others of average or taller height make this complaint, but it works fine for vertically challenged folks like me ;-)

The cruise control controls were the worst I have ever seen. They are

Toyota has used this arrangement for a long time and I agree, it seems like a needlessly complicated setup to make the stalk rotate with the wheel instead of fixed on the column.

I've heard of several complaints about wind noise in this generation Rav4. Without hearing the level of wind noise in a "normal" Rav4, it is impossible to know what is abnormal, but one of the things I've read is to check the crossbars on the roof rack. There is a small arrow on the sides of the crossbars, and they should be pointed forward to reduce wind noise. It may be a drop in the bucket, but every little bit helps. If you do not need the cross bars, it may be worth removing them to reduce noise.

- Fuel economy - we averaged only a little over 21 mpg for the trip but I

The EPA fuel economy for the optional 6 cylinder engine is almost the same as the 4 cylinder. To me, that is an indication that the 4 cylinder motor has to work too hard to be very efficient.

thanks for the post!

Reply to
Ray O

I suspect the CR-V is a great vehicle. I have not had a chance to try one. I don't particualrly care for the look of the CR-V. I won't calim the RAV4 is beautiful, but I think it olooks better than the new CR-V. My SO considered a CR-V, but the RAV4 was less expensive and she prefers Toyotas (although her son will soon be driving a new Civic Si).

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

I'll take a look at this. The SO wants the cross bars for carrying her Canoe (and once the Canoe is up there, all other wind noise complains will be overwhelmed).

From past experience I feel certain the SO will get at least 2 mpg better mileage than I will. When I still owned an Expedition, she would average over 17 mpg when driving the Expedition and I struggled to get 15. On the other hand, I can get from Raleigh to Columbia in 4 hours. It takes her 4.5 to 5 hours. I am hoping it is like several other cars I've owned recently and that the mileage will significantly increase after 5000 miles. My Nissan picked up over 2 mpg between 2000 miles an 10,000 miles.

Any thoughts on using 0W20 oil in the RAV4? Toyota recommends either 5W20 or

0W20. At the last oil change I when with 0W20 Mobil 1. The SO is worried this is too thin (her Dad likes 10W40).

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

I've got a RAV4 2006 V6 4WD

Never heard of most of these complaints before from owners or from any of the test reports!

The steering wheel position was too low, even though it had a tilt

OK for me but I'm ~ average height

A stalk not moving with the wheel would be VERY bad you'd have difficulty using it when the wheel was turned. Its a bit low on the wheel but you learn that in a few minutes.The cruise control works very well.. no engage lag and holds uniform speed.

HVAC controls were not stupid. In my opinion the person or persons

Huh... I think they are large and easy to use ... better than the auto air controls in the limited model.

There is a lot more engine noise with the 4 cyl than V6 on acceleration but I don't have a problem with wind noise. Maybe the roof rack x-beams were on backwards.

I've heard there is a lack of thigh support for some long legged people. No problem for me.

I like them ... lots of side elimination on low beam. Some people have complained about the abrupt top edge to the elimination but I like that feature and so do drivers of oncoming cars.

Gives more interior storage space and easy to get at to change a flat.tire. You might like crawling under the back to get a tire ... not me.

I wish the rear gate would hinge from the left though.

Best features for me. The 269 HP V6 is a rocket! One of the quickest vehicles I've owned and it gets great MPG too!

rj

Reply to
Ron Jones

I have pretty much the same vehicle except it's a 2006.

*snip*

*snip*

I actually like the HVAC controls better than anything I've driven before. I find they are easy to use.

I agree. the shifter takes some time to get used to and I still don't like it much. I would have greatly preferred a manual transmission anyway but it's no longer an option :-(

Agreed. It's a weird placement choice although the windows adjust easily.

*snip*

I've never gone below 23 mpg in my RAV4 in any driving situations. Most of the time I get about 26 mpg with 30% city/ 70% hwy driving with hwy speeds averaging about 62-65. I just passed 4000 miles in my vehicle.

I don't have any prblem with the headlights.

I know a lot of people complain about this. I don't really care one way or another...at least not enough to dissuade me from buying the vehicle.

I much prefer to have the outside mounted tire if it gains me inside space (which it does in the RAV4 w/o the 3rd row seats). I also do NOT want to have to crawl under my vehicle to get to my spare.

I have heard a lot of people have complained about the Vue's long term build quality. I had a 2002 CRV that was really good to me although I drove it like crazy. My brother bought a V6 Escape about the same time and sold it a year later even though he liked it. It just had too many visits to the shop. Even under warranty, it was too much a waste of his time having to take it in.

JennL

Reply to
tanukiki

One of these days John Law will slow you down...LOL

Reply to
Scott in Florida

Check out the rapid depreciation on the Ford Escape too! Yotas cost more but retain more of their value over the years.

Reply to
Wolfgang

Why would this matter to my Sister. Her Escape is already 6 years and she will probably drive it for another four or five. I just check KBB and they claim the private party value for a 6 years old Escape in good condition is $7500. A RAV4 of similar vintage and equipment is worth $8500. As I recall, my Sister paid under $19K for the Escape in 2001. A base model RAV4 with a manual was around $18K at that time and a 2001 RAV4 was smaller and only available with a I-4 Engine. I am guessing that a 2001 RAV4 with an automatic and the upgraded interior would have been closer to $20K, so I can't see where there is a great difference in depreciation.

But even if you are right, it seems to me that the budget concious consumer would buy a 2 or 3 year old Escape coming off a lease. You are then getting the advantage of someone else's depreciation. It seems like the worst thing to do is buy a used Toyota.

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

Just in terms of finances, it looks that way. But the likelihood of buying someone else's troubled Escape is higher than with a RAV4. Of course, that's a risk you run with buying any used car..

JennL

Reply to
tanukiki

Besides additional wind noise, I think MPG will take a major hit with the canoe on top ;-)

I am not that knowledgeable about motor oil and its properties, so this is only an observation and opinion on my part, but automakers seem to be trending towards lower viscosity oil in order to improve fuel economy. The quality of oil has probably improved greatly over the years and no longer needs to be thick to be effective.

At least from my experience with Toyota, I've always found that you won't go wrong following the engineer's recommendations. If it were my car, I'd probably go with the 0W-20 if ambient temps allowed it.

Reply to
Ray O

If I remember correctly, the only Escape recommended by Consumer Reports, is the hybrid version due to rollover and handling issues in other versions.

Reply to
Art

Thanks for taking the time to write it up.

[snippage]

Toyota's done it that way for a long time. Previous Toyota owners will find it familiar.

Did you notice that if you pull it towards you, that's "Cancel?" I owned mine a while before I realized it.

The plus to having it move along with the wheel is the you can still reach it with you finger and tweak it up/dow/cancel without taking your hands off the wheel during a turn. I'm not sure how big a bonus this may be, as I'm rarely going to be tweaking my speed via the CC in the middle of a maneuver. In that situation, most of us will kill the CC by touching the brake or override it by stepping on the accelerator.

[snippage] [Wind Noise!]

Wind noise? I hear ya. The '96 to '00 Ravs are noisy this way, too. Don't know about the '01s to '05s. On the other hand, this means opening the sunroof doesn't add a lot of noise, relatively speaking.

Could it be the exhaust system? My older Ravs all sound rattly when accelerating but it's the exhaust, the engine up front seems very quiet (two are nearly silent, the oldest ticks a bit more). Perhaps you should put on a cat-back and a fart-cannon system? :-)

[snippage]

Is this a new "feature?" I've got older Ravs with 70K, 92K and 121K miles on them and, so far, the dealer has neglected to hit me up for a valve adjustment. And this dealer is not one to miss a revenue opportunity. Is it possible that they're adjustable but don't require it for hundreds of thousands of miles? I'm OK with that. In any event, no large bill for it, yet.

I know a couple people with conventional Escapes and they are satisfied with them, although I note that a few-year-old escape is rated 8.6 on Edmunds. I believe CR also rates the Escape as relatively reliable (but my recollection may be incorrect). Some reviewers on Edmunds remarked on getting significantly better than the EPA estimates for fuel economy with the Escape hybrid. I was very tempted to look at the Escape hybrid the last time we bought a car but my wife, who has a long memory, nixed any Ford.

Reply to
DH

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.