Hi,

Just curious about what people think of the 4WD vs
Front WD for the RAV4?

I've only had front-wheel drive cars up to now and they
have been just fine (Honda Civic before, 1991 Toyota Corolla
DX Wagon now)

I am seriously considering a RAV4, and I am tempted to
get the 4x2 as the car will be 99% of the time on paved
roads :-)

I think the slightly better fuel economy and possibly fewer
problems with a simpler mechanical setup will lead to better
long-term reliability/maintenance.

Your thoughts? (You may also toss in opinions for 4cyl vs v6 ..
I'm leaning towards the 4cyl .. no need to tow much, I know
that's one major difference in addition to possibly better
acceleration)

Thanks!

Esmail

Hachiroku wrote:
Well, right now I'm in NE Ohio, but I will be moving most likely next
year (not sure where in the US).

I drove my front-wheel vehicles without troubles in the harsh Iowa
winters for many years. I suppose if I had mountains to contend with
a 4WD would be a safer choice. Perhaps I should try to wait on a new
car until I know where I am moving ...

Yes, Toyotas are great cars and super reliable in my experience.
My 1991 Corolla Wagon has had only break pads replaced and the
battery once. That's all .. trouble free as can be.

Esmail

"Wolfgang" <NOwolfXgang_dieterxSPAM (AT) NOXcox (DOT) netNOT> wrote

You get a few more mpg with the Matrix but the rear visibility is horrible
and the instrument cluster is messed up IMO. Test drove a Matrix and knocked
that right off of the list. It's a cool looking vehicle from the outside
though.

--

Tanukiki (mom of 2 wonderful boys)

tanukiki wrote:
I have to agree with you, test drove one too .. plus I don't even
really like the way it looks :-)

Personally though, I wish they hadn't made the new (2006+) RAV4 bigger,
I thought the size was just fine. I read that the RAV4 sold in Japan
and Europe is not larger like the US version.

Wolfgang wrote:
I thought about it, and in spite of thinking it's somewhat an ugly
car I took a test drive and didn't really like it. Poor visibility
compared to my current car, and it felt cheap'ish .. the ride wasn't
nearly as nice as the RAV4 either :-)

Wish the RAV4 hadn't grown in size in 2006 .. I was happy with its
dimensions.

"Esmail Bonakdarian" <ebonak-a (AT) t-hotmail (DOT) com> wrote

That's funny because I didn't consider the previous RAV4 over the 02 CRV I
bought because I thought it was too small inside. The only reason I looked
at the RAV4 this time was because it was bigger than the second gen RAV4s
(and I think the new 07 CRV is fugly!!!).

--

Tanukiki (mom of 2 wonderful boys)

This is not quite a RAV4 but I have an AWD 02 V-6 Highlander.

I live in No. Calif. and we do get some snow as well as I periodically
go to Reno during the winter. AWD, IMHO, is well worth the slight
cost/mileage penalty. Handling is great for a higher profile rig.
Yep its a Toyota so when it says "inflate tires to 35psi if you intend
to cruise over 100 mph (where legal)" you can be pretty sure its a
good drive system.

Ron

tanukiki wrote:
:-)

Bonehenge wrote:
Well, I like 4 seasons, so I've lived in Iowa and Ohio which have
regularly very snowy winters .. but that's worked out ok with my
front-wheel drive Corolla Wagon over the years.

he he ...

Yes, I think so too .. but if I end up moving to Colorado for a new
job, or up-up-up-state NY, I may reconsider.

that sounds great. Actually, I was looking at a Subaru Legacy
Wagon .. manual! .. but the dealership around here was so bad and
rude, and I wasn't able to have another dealership find me the
particular car I gave up on it.

I enjoy driving manual, it's too bad the RAV4 doesn't come that way,
as most of the cars nowadays seem automatic only :-(

Esmail

ron wrote:
That's what I am trying to determine.

Ok, I'm a bit puzzled by this .. of course Toyota is great quality,
but I am missing the significance of the quote from the manual you
provide. This must be due to my lack of knowledge of 4WD vehicles.