Topic: First Drive: 2016 Toyota RAV4

[dirtyjeffer]

cars, you get what you pay for... if a car is less money but has more features on the surface, it's those items under the surface that were cheaped out on... and those are what i care about.

there is nothing "cheap" about the new Sorento...drive one.

[tooscoops]

i have...

i have also had multiple trade-ins of the last gen (up to 2014's) where people just grew out of love with them for whatever reason.

i agree that they are nice vehicles... and i tell customers/friends that are looking at them the same thing. but my statement still stands... you don't get something for nothing. to give you an idea, had a 2013 corolla traded in... required an oil change to be perfect for my lot. a 2013 sorento i got the same day with lower kms required a new back up cam module, a new roof rack (paint was peeling), a new door lock actuator or something, and a new key fob.

just a one off, but i have yet to get a kia/hyundai trade in that required nothing.

don't mean to take away from the great products they make, but to assume you get everything from more expensive products for the same price is ignoring the main principal of business... they are in it to make money... they have to cut costs somewhere.

[EV-Light]

the upper trims seem nicely equipped, but they're pretty much the same price as the larger and more powerful Sorento.

Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps some people don't want larger?  And with more power comes more fuel consumed - I'd like to see the Sorento in any guise get 6.9L/100km in the city (to Kia's credit, I'd also like to see the Rav4 get this...in the city, the Corolla does in the mid-7s, so that would be great for an 'AWD' (well, FWD unless there's slippage) vehicle).

of course it has, but i don't think the exterior dimensions are THAT much larger (but yes, still larger)...my comment was more about the similar comparison in pricing, and was curious how many might simply choose the Sorento, which seems to be regarded as more premium (from many of the journalists who review it).

also of note, as most people finance, the max term on the RAV4 is 72 months and the rate is 3.99% (AWD Limited trim)...that means a payment of $695.68 all-in (or a total price of $50,088.96)...in comparison, the Sorento EX trim is $582.95 all-in for the same 72 months (but you can do 84 months at 0% too, which would bring your payment down to $499.68 all-in)...the Sorento EX would be $41,972.40 in total, or a whopping $8116.56 more expensive.

regarding resale, sure, the RAV-4 will likely be worth more after 6 years of ownership (% of initial price), but it should be...it cost you $8k more to buy.

I am yet to find someone that would walk into a Toyota dealer and compare it to a Kia. Toyota buyers expect to pay more and get better quality of their vehicles...while Kia buyers go after the cheap stuff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dirtyjeffer]

i have...

the 2016?

it is MUCH improved over the previous model.

i drove a 2015 Santa Fe late last year and came away unimpressed...this new Sorento is in a whole different league...it's THAT different from the Santa Fe.

[dirtyjeffer]

I am yet to find someone that would walk into a Toyota dealer and compare it to a Kia. Toyota buyers expect to pay more and get better quality of their vehicles...while Kia buyers go after the cheap stuff.

a vast majority of newer Kia vehicles i see on the road (around here anyway) are usually mid to high trim levels...yes, there are some lower trim vehicles, but many are the well equipped versions, likely because they are often similar in price to other brands lower trim models (but this way they get the extra goodies)...and while Kia quality was likely a valid discussion to have several years ago, times have changed...they are comparable in quality to pretty much everything else out there...i realize the new Sorento just won an award for Top Quality in the CUV/SUV category, and i realize Kia as a brand just finished in 2nd place (to Porsche) in terms of quality, but i'm not going to say they make THE BEST quality regular cars...just that they make comparable quality vehicles to other brands.

[tooscoops]

i have...

the 2016?

it is MUCH improved over the previous model.

i drove a 2015 Santa Fe late last year and came away unimpressed...this new Sorento is in a whole different league...it's THAT different from the Santa Fe.

actually no i didn't! only a 15 (and previous years)... i thought 16 was just a carryover year? my bad, I'll check it out...

but my main gripe isn't how nice it is when shiny and new... i think they are some of the nicest showroom cars in their segments. it's how they wear. i'm used to my chrysler stuff and always making excuses for how they age... i find these at best, on par through my experience.

[dirtyjeffer]

i have...

the 2016?

it is MUCH improved over the previous model.

i drove a 2015 Santa Fe late last year and came away unimpressed...this new Sorento is in a whole different league...it's THAT different from the Santa Fe.

actually no i didn't! only a 15 (and previous years)... i thought 16 was just a carryover year? my bad, I'll check it out...

but my main gripe isn't how nice it is when shiny and new... i think they are some of the nicest showroom cars in their segments. it's how they wear. i'm used to my chrysler stuff and always making excuses for how they age... i find these at best, on par through my experience.

go take a new 16 for nice drive...completely different vehicle (pretty much all new from the ground up)...it isn't "sporty", more what i would call a "touring" feel...not that it rolls around in the corners, but it rides more like a premium vehicle in terms of being quiet and providing a very comfortable ride over the various road undulations.

my 2012 Rio5 still looks brand new, so i think how they wear might also have something to do with how they are maintained and treated...if you treat your vehicle like $hit, don't expect it to look great or run well after 5 years.

[Danno001]

my 2012 Rio5 still looks brand new, so i think how they wear might also have something to do with how they are maintained and treated...if you treat your vehicle like $hit, don't expect it to look great or run well after 5 years.

So does my 2013 Sonata with 78,000 kms. Still nowhere needing brakes.  Just new tires ($700) and regular oil changes as maintenance - that's it.

My Toyota Venza on the other hand needed tires ($1,100) at 50,000 kms, brakes ($1000) at 60,000 kms, 2 X wheel speed sensors at $500 per sensor (just past warranty) and a rear wheel hub at $900, again just past warranty.
PS The tire costs are on top of having winters to swap every season.

[Noto]

my 2012 Rio5 still looks brand new, so i think how they wear might also have something to do with how they are maintained and treated...if you treat your vehicle like $hit, don't expect it to look great or run well after 5 years.

So does my 2013 Sonata with 78,000 kms. Still nowhere needing brakes.  Just new tires ($700) and regular oil changes as maintenance - that's it.

My Toyota Venza on the other hand needed tires ($1,100) at 50,000 kms, brakes ($1000) at 60,000 kms, 2 X wheel speed sensors at $500 per sensor (just past warranty) and a rear wheel hub at $900, again just past warranty.
PS The tire costs are on top of having winters to swap every season.

I should refer you to my FJC thread...the Corolla has also not been the epitome of reliability...

That said, and even given my newfound experiences, I'd sooner take a Toyota over a Kia or Hyundai in terms of reliability...

[johngenx]

On the flip side to NoTo, our Corolla has been very reliable and feels very well made.  Based on our experiences with the Corolla and Highlander, I would not hesitate to buy another Toyota product.

[dirtyjeffer]

On the flip side to NoTo, our Corolla has been very reliable and feels very well made.  Based on our experiences with the Corolla and Highlander, I would not hesitate to buy another Toyota product.

i wouldn't hesitate to buy another Toyota either (we've owned one before too)...my point wasn't that Kia was better than anything else (despite their recent awards), just that they are just as good as everyone else.

[Noto]

On the flip side to NoTo, our Corolla has been very reliable

...you've had almost the same crap as I have...and THEN some!  Our feelings over "reliability" differ:

2009 Corolla - 160K - nothing.

Lies.  I know you've had some sh!t go wrong.

The thread is about what is currently needing repairs.  The Corolla needs nothing right now.

In the past, the Corolla has had a few recalls, one for the power window switch, one for the VVTi gear and now one for the Takata airbag.  Oh, and the trunk springs.

In terms of repairs, the only true mechanical failure was the waterpump starting making some noise in March - replaced the original plastic impeller model with the newer metal one.  While I was in there, I could hear a very slight noise from the alternator, so I also replaced it to be proactive.  Changed the coolant then too, of course.

Front brakes at about 125K.  Some tires along the way.  Changed the trans fluid at 100K despite Toyota saying it's "fill for life."

The body and interior are in great shape, no squeaks or rattles and the paint still cleans up great despite it about to finish it's eighth year with us.  I might put a new battery in sometime soon, again being proactive.

[johngenx]

I don't consider one water pump failure in 160K unreliable.

[Noto]

I don't consider one water pump failure in 160K unreliable.

I'm just mad about the CEL on a Japanese car

[aquadorhj]

my boss is driving a rental Rav4 right now.

i drove it, and i ...  liked it.     

sure, it's not fast, interior kind of sucks, it leans a bit in corners, seat not that comfy, etc..

BUT,
the knowledge that it will likely be VERY reliable for a long time, is like a security blanket that warms the soul...

[Ex-airbalancer]

my boss is driving a rental Rav4 right now.

i drove it, and i ...  liked it.     

sure, it's not fast, interior kind of sucks, it leans a bit in corners, seat not that comfy, etc..

BUT,
the knowledge that it will likely be VERY reliable for a long time, is like a security blanket that warms the soul...

http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/showthread.php?p=413367#post413367
Some interesting US numbers

[dirtyjeffer]

my boss is driving a rental Rav4 right now.

i drove it, and i ...  liked it.     

sure, it's not fast, interior kind of sucks, it leans a bit in corners, seat not that comfy, etc..

BUT,
the knowledge that it will likely be VERY reliable for a long time, is like a security blanket that warms the soul...

most brands are going to be pretty reliable for the long term nowadays so i'm not really sure the rest of the compromises are really necessary.

[Ex-airbalancer]

5.43 L/100km in a hybrid Rav 4

[mixmanmash]

5.43 L/100km in a hybrid Rav 4

Very good, considering the average speed too.

[safristi]

my boss is driving a rental Rav4 right now.

i drove it, and i ...  liked it.     

sure, it's not fast, interior kind of sucks, it leans a bit in corners, seat not that comfy, etc..

BUT,
the knowledge that it will likely be VERY reliable for a long time, is like a security blanket that warms the soul...

..wow overwhelming recommendation.....drove one 2 years ago and it was the slowest thing..nice interior (upper level ones)..kept calling back with $400 monthly offers.....................the Hyundai,Mazda and Subie comparitors were way better...and I'm a Woodstock guy.........Just love those sunrise sunset pics taken in the MOUNTAINS just outside Woodstock....