Rav4 - enough space for baby?

I raised a baby with a VW Bug --- but then I didn't have DVD player, bouncy-bouncy, breast pump, etc.

Hell, a lot of us even MADE a few babies in bugs LOL

mike hunt

Wolfgang wrote:

If it's got to be Toyota - 4 cylinder Camry.

One good test is to try installing the infant car seat in the backseat. If you are happy with the results in the RAV4, then buy it. If it is a major pain to install the car seat, look for a larger car.

My brother and his wife have a 2005 Corolla, and the baby seat barely fits in the back seat. The front passenger seat has to be moved almost all the way forward for the baby seat to fit. I don't know how roomier the Rav4 is in the back (if at all), but I agree with the other poster who said that a

The bad thing about a Rav4 is not the room for a baby seat (and I like Toyotas) but it is the rear hatch design. There is no rear bumber and tire is mounted on back of hatch. It someone taps you in the rear the slightest bit or if you back up into something by accident you will have a very expensive repair of rear hatch and that was the reason I did not get one when my wife looked at them 5 years ago and they have not changed in that regard either.

I was almost ready to buy the RAV but I test drove the Honda CR-V at the last minute. No comparision! The Honda is CLEARLY the better vehicle, ESPECIALLY for a young family with baby seats, strollers, etc. And it's a better dollar value. I got the Special Edition with leather and all the goodies for about $1000 less than a loaded RAV that did NOT have leather. And while they get the same gas mileage, the Honda is 600 pounds heavier...read...SAFER. I admit that the RAV is "cuter" than the awkward CR-V, but truthfully only the "base" CR-V looks awkward and the Special Edition looks very very nice. And you can't go wrong with EITHER Toyota OR Honda in terms of quality and long term durability. I love Toyota...I also own a Lexus LS430....but in this case Honda makes the better product (unless you are perhaps a younger person who values "cute" over utility).

Your comments about the miles per gallon are just not true. BOTH the HONDA CR-V and the TOY RAV 4 get 22 city/27 highway, yet the Honda weighs 3494 lbs vs the RAV at 3196...about 10% heavier getting the same economy.

Some EPA rating are not wrth the paper they are printed on and are not real world driving at all. The EPA is under a mandate by 2006 to make test more realist and harder to cheat on. I friend/fellow worker of my wife (my wife is a teacher) has a CR-V and is disappointed in the fuel mileage she is getting. BTW the 4x4 CR-V is rated 21/26 with a manual and the RAV4 is rated 22/27 and RAV4 has a 5 year 60K mile drive train warranty and the CR-V is only 3/36. You might say that you do not need the longer warranty but 3/36 is pretty much the minimum in industry and a atou maker that is confidant with their cars can offer a longer warranty and not get hosed on repair cost and if you ever get a Honda fixed out of warranty at a dealer you will find out first hand when a "hosing" is. Also RAV 4 has more headroom and legroom in front seat than a CR-V and RAV4 has sequentail fuel injection and the CR-V has a cheaper multipoint system. Through in it weighing 200 to 300 less and that can make a big difference in MPG in this type of vehical. My old camary was rated 26/34 as I recall and I got as high as 41MPG on hiway and routinely got upper 20?s in town and upper 30?s on the road with A/C on. Toyota makes some excellant cars. My son has a old and worn 90 tercel with a carb that got 43 mpg on a trip recently and car runs well and is zippy too and it has 170K on it as well. It is really hard to wear out a Yota, even when they are old. I have a friend that used to love Hondas but gave up on them because he got tired of the cost of repairing them when they got more than a few years old. When my toy was totaled at 220k it still had oringinal clutch and had its first timing belt replaced at 180K miles and it was not broken and other than that outside of normal maintaince (oil changes and a few new batteries and a few sets of brakes I did myself) I never spent a dime on car for "repairs"

Every car maker has good and bad dealers. Don't say that Honda dealers are the "hosing" type based on an experience with just one such dealer.

I find this hard to believe, unless he either got a rare lemon or he didn't take care of it. Many Hondas last just as long as Toyotas with a minimum of problems.

C'mon. While it's true that the EPA number is often far from reality, the POINT is that BOTH the RAV and CR-V get the SAME EPA rating. It is an apples to apples comparison. So while BOTH may deviate in the real world, it's unlikely that the RAV will do any better than the CR-V. Period.

Just go price Honda parts at a dea;er, ANY dealer. My friend owned several accords but got tired of getting skinned getting them repaired and his last skinning was about 7 years ago when it cost him over 600 bucks to have the alt replaced at the dealer. The alt was close to 250 and over 350 labor to change it because AIR compressor and axle shaft had to be pulled to access it. It will be a cold day in "H" before I buy a car that has to have AC compressor and axle shaft removed for a "simple" alt change

The point is every Yota I have owned or driven has exceed its EPA rating easily but I have not heard the same claims on a Honda CR-V. Its size, profile and extra weight will never let it match the RAV4 in MPG and it will likely trail it by several MPG in the real world.

C'mon. Toyota has models that would also require expensive repairs, depending on the design. Look at the data...Hondas and Toyotas are similarly ranked in almost all categories as to costs and quality. That being said, the DESIGN of the CR-V would, in my opinion, better meet the needs of a young family. Whereas the RAV might better meet the needs of a single person. EITHER will be a good choice as to the expectation of few required repairs, fuel economy and durability.

We have a 1988 Toyota Corolla hatch - 2 door with 2 baby seats in it. Not the family car of choice, but fine when we didn't have kids, and we can't afford to replace it as long as it keeps on going (it is the Energizer car...) Based on this, get a 4 door vehicle - it makes loading up a lot easier. The Rav is available in a 4 door model. The Rav would have enough space for the usual baby things, based on the Corolla, however, we did find that one of those 3 wheel Mountain Buggy baby strollers was to long to easily fit in the back. A "normal" one was fine, and after a few months, after the baby is bigger and able to support their head better, we went to one of those collapsible "umbrella handle" strollers that take up no more space than a couple of umbrellas.No problem from then. Get an economical car - kids cost more to run than a V8 monster truck :-) Geoff

Now THERE'S a true statement! And trust me, costs get exponentially more when they become teenagers.

Mine are nearly gone and they still cost a fortune!!