Jump to content

2019 Toyota RAV4


DACH
 Share

Recommended Posts

Good question! I've been in the market for 3 to 4 months and did several hours research. Happy to share my thoughts on all the options! It's going to be a long post...

 

I was torn between the CX5 and CRV until the very end at the car show.

 

But my view on the others:

 

Forester: The glasshouse and visibility was probably amongst the best of all the cars. On a per feature basis, probably one of the best value cars. But I wasn't a fan of the new design (consider it overstyled). Biggest thing though, is it's severely underpowered. The car just wouldn't move when you wanted it too. Overseas reviewers complain that the 2.5 engine is underpowered and SG gets a 2.0. Reliability also isn't amazing and the CVT transmission was super sluggish.

 

X1: This one is a bit more complicated. Been a huge BMW fan over the past 20 years. My dream car remains an M5. But having followed them for so long, I'm also very realistic about them. Truthfully, (IMO) the X1 isn't a true BMW. It's a mass market BMW to increase sales and generate profit off the BMW badge. Meaning to say, I refuse to pay an extra 30% premium for a badge when there are better cars out there for the price. A badge doesn't make me go faster or get there in more comfort! Reliability and performance isn't great of BMW and the X1 compared to their Japanese counterparts and it's not hugely practical. We have friends with an x1 and it can barely fit a set of golf clubs in the back. Basically, I would rather spend my money on a better car than buy the badge.

 

Tuscon: Perfectly good car. Pretty good value for money. DSG okay, but not amazing. Interior quality was passable. Really good car if you're just looking for a straightforward workhorse. For me, the SG trim just didn't have an X-factor that I wanted. Whereas the cx5 had drivability and crv had better space utilisation and 7 seats, the Tuscon was just really good at the basics and nothing more. Which by the way is fine for most people - just not me.

 

Outlander/eclipse cross - cheapest and best after sales offers (ie warranty). Beyond that it's a Mitsubishi and that's not a good thing right now. I loved Mitsu back in the rally days with their Evo, but as a car company today they've fallen back to creating a a range of mediocre cars. Yes, they've hooked onto the Nissan/Renault relationship and improved a bit, but there is a reason they have the longest warranty and are cheapest - because their product is mediocre.

 

RAV4 - Reasons above.

 

Harrier - didn't like interior design. Exterior design not my cup of tea. Way too many on the road. Nice engine. Nothing special about it IMO.

 

Sorento - I really liked the sorento. Amazing value for money. It's technically not in the same category as these cars (mid-sized SUV) and that's why we didn't go for it. The sorento is a huge car (I think 20cm longer than the CRV), and myself and my wife are going to be driving. Coming from a Mazda2 that's a massive shift. Too massive in my opinion. The other killer is that it's diesel. I have nothing against diesel, but road tax is 4 times higher than the CRV and we don't drive enough mileage to reach a breakeven point of lower FC and lower diesel cost.

 

Karoq - actually really good value for money considering it's a continental car. Good interior quality and nice touches like ambient lighting. But it's a continental car and I didn't want a continental car. Not because I don't like them, but generally speaking less reliable and more costly to run (E.g insurance). Skoda is also a bit of an unknown in SG.

 

Peugeot 3008 - it's French. I don't do French cars. I refuse.

 

Tiguan - nice car. Expensive. Avoided continental because you pay more for badge and the fact its continental. Also don't like VW due to dieselgate.

 

CX5 - my first choice. Amazing to drive for an SUV in this bracket. Looks amazing. The soul red crystal is gorgeous. Would've gotten it without question, until I started learning about omv and arf. TEK (the distributor) severely overprices the higher trim CX5 (just look at the margins) and then has the gall to provide worse warranty and servicing (3+1 year vs 5+3 of others). The 2.0 premium is not a bad price given Mazda wants to move upmarket, but it is slightly underpowered and I much prefer the 2.5 responsiveness. But way too expensive for the higher trims. Plus higher road tax and insurance than crv. The final thing that made me choose the CRV over the cx5 is just interior space. The cx5 has more premium materials and finish, but comparing it back-to-back in the motorshow, it's a huge difference in available space. Even something was simple as the passenger opening the centre console, as the driver I had to move arm to get out of the way, whereas the CRV I was undisturbed. Then other things like the size of the entry ridge on the door is higher, so it's harder to get in. Don't get me wrong though, the cx5 is the choice of my heart. I love a nice driving and handling car and this was top of my criteria. But the fact that I felt I was getting a crappier deal on everything else because of TEK, I chose against it.

 

CRV - the choice we went with. Definitely think it's one of the more expensive options. The 5-seater is a no go and way overpriced with few basic features. Don't get the 5-seater. Material quality good, but not as premium as the cx5. Little features that irritate me like no seat memory on electric seats (why?!) and the top tether for a child seat is in a really crappy location. Really no deal breakers though, and I think the better compromise for my situation. It's definitely not as driver focused as the cx5, but more of comfort cruiser (though road noise feela more). The cvt is smooth and not designed for performance, but as far as a cvt goes it's pretty good. Don't like how there is no manual override either (though I've never use it, it's nice to have it there). I then thought about my situation and when it comes to driving pleasure, there really isn't many places in Singapore where we can enjoy the handling (unlike UK or New Zealand). Closest place is Malaysia, but in that case, the space of the CRV would be much preferred. The 7-seater and pano roof was my xfactor. Yes, the back two seats are small, but we would only use it to cart my in-laws around on short trips (we don't live with them). The piano-roof would keep my son amused for a while. Few other things is I like how the CRV is unique on Singapore roads. That's crazy given the same model is a best seller in US and MY. In US alone they sold 330,000 last year, which is probably equal to the number of cars in SG. The lower insurance and road tax is a big plus. I also don't feel I'm being screwed by Kah Motors as this car has a 19% premium with 5+3 warranty and servicing. Importantly, I also don't feel I'm being screwed as much as our overseas counterparts. Yes, it lacks features like Honda Sensing (which I would like), but at least the engine and equipment levels are similar to our overseas counterparts. I hate that because of our laws here and the size of the market, we get underpowered engines, crappier gearboxes, fewer features at 5 times the price. The CRV and Tuscon was the least impacted by this in the options. Not saying the best option for everyone, but at least I feel it was for me. Oh for the CRV there is a major TSB out for the engine, which was concerning. Oil Dilution. But it doesn't affect SG and our region as the problems only occur under -10 degrees celsius.

 

Super long post, but hope it helps you. All of it is my opinion of course. I'm sure others are in different situations.

Nicely written and good reference !!! For rav4, it’s 120k and cheaper than crv, I find it quite good value. Design wise rav4 is a bit boxy and resemble eclipse cross in some angle. I Like the rav4 2l engine as I find crv turbo a bit lag. Both car feel spacious. But crv 5 seats are seriously lacking in features and 7 seats are 144k. Waiting to test drive rav4 before commit.
↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow super detailed opinions! Thanks for the honest feedback, these models are exactly what I wanted to read about.

No problems! Glad that my months of research month help someone. I try tell my wife and she doesn't care. Just as long as "colour okay, practical and drives okay,then okay already".

 

Though she also knows I know a lot about cars, so whatever choice we got would've been best choice for us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nicely written and good reference !!! For rav4, it’s 120k and cheaper than crv, I find it quite good value. Design wise rav4 is a bit boxy and resemble eclipse cross in some angle. I Like the rav4 2l engine as I find crv turbo a bit lag. Both car feel spacious. But crv 5 seats are seriously lacking in features and 7 seats are 144k. Waiting to test drive rav4 before commit.

 

Why do you like RAV 2L engine?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nicely written and good reference !!! For rav4, itâs 120k and cheaper than crv, I find it quite good value. Design wise rav4 is a bit boxy and resemble eclipse cross in some angle. I Like the rav4 2l engine as I find crv turbo a bit lag. Both car feel spacious. But crv 5 seats are seriously lacking in features and 7 seats are 144k. Waiting to test drive rav4 before commit.

I also think the rav4 is good value and was somewhat wowed when I was told the price. But I would wait for the higher trim levels first. They only have one trim level that is too basic. Toyota sense is cool. But having old school headunit it is unforgivable for this car. It is silly, but come on!

 

I also agree the CRV 7-seater is pricey, and I justified some of the price difference through lower road tax and insurance.

 

For me, it really came down to intangibles. When a car designer and engineer build a car, they build it holistically around a specific engine, gearbox, chassis and specific success criteria. After they build the 'ideal' version, they create variants with bigger/small engines etc. But it doesn't change the fact that the car was built around a specific drivetrain.

 

I found it harder to justify some models, because SG always gets down-rated versions due to our laws. That is, we always get models where the engine and gearbox was never actually designed for the car in the first place. Cx5 and Rav4 are examples of this, as both were built around 2.5l engines and 6/8 speed gearboxes. In other words, we don't get the experience that the engineer or the designer envisaged. Rather we get a watered down experience.

 

That's partly why I like the CRV. It was always intended to be the 1.5T engine, CVT transmission etc. So we get the same experience our US counterparts get (but at 5x the price). It's super intangible, but that's part of why I like the CRV.

 

But you choose your car that you like and works for you, your family and budget. As long as you're happy with the purchase, I think that matters the most. It's hardly a science. It's all down to personal choice and budget.

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think the rav4 is good value and was somewhat wowed when I was told the price. But I would wait for the higher trim levels first. They only have one trim level that is too basic. Toyota sense is cool. But having old school headunit it is unforgivable for this car. It is silly, but come on!

 

I also agree the CRV 7-seater is pricey, and I justified some of the price difference through lower road tax and insurance.

 

For me, it really came down to intangibles. When a car designer and engineer build a car, they build it holistically around a specific engine, gearbox, chassis and specific success criteria. After they build the 'ideal' version, they create variants with bigger/small engines etc. But it doesn't change the fact that the car was built around a specific drivetrain.

 

I found it harder to justify some models, because SG always gets down-rated versions due to our laws. That is, we always get models where the engine and gearbox was never actually designed for the car in the first place. Cx5 and Rav4 are examples of this, as both were built around 2.5l engines and 6/8 speed gearboxes. In other words, we don't get the experience that the engineer or the designer envisaged. Rather we get a watered down experience.

 

That's partly why I like the CRV. It was always intended to be the 1.5T engine, CVT transmission etc. So we get the same experience our US counterparts get (but at 5x the price). It's super intangible, but that's part of why I like the CRV.

 

But you choose your car that you like and works for you, your family and budget. As long as you're happy with the purchase, I think that matters the most. It's hardly a science. It's all down to personal choice and budget.

I dropped CR-V off my list because it is MIT... so my shortlist now is Forester, Harrier and the new RAV4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I dropped CR-V off my list because it is MIT... so my shortlist now is Forester, Harrier and the new RAV4

Fair enough. I don't consider MIT to be a big deal, as it's just luck around if you get good apple or bad apple. But that's for me.

 

Even if it's a Rolls Royce or Ferrari, you can get problems if you're unlucky.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think the rav4 is good value and was somewhat wowed when I was told the price. But I would wait for the higher trim levels first. They only have one trim level that is too basic. Toyota sense is cool. But having old school headunit it is unforgivable for this car. It is silly, but come on!

 

I also agree the CRV 7-seater is pricey, and I justified some of the price difference through lower road tax and insurance.

 

For me, it really came down to intangibles. When a car designer and engineer build a car, they build it holistically around a specific engine, gearbox, chassis and specific success criteria. After they build the 'ideal' version, they create variants with bigger/small engines etc. But it doesn't change the fact that the car was built around a specific drivetrain.

 

I found it harder to justify some models, because SG always gets down-rated versions due to our laws. That is, we always get models where the engine and gearbox was never actually designed for the car in the first place. Cx5 and Rav4 are examples of this, as both were built around 2.5l engines and 6/8 speed gearboxes. In other words, we don't get the experience that the engineer or the designer envisaged. Rather we get a watered down experience.

 

That's partly why I like the CRV. It was always intended to be the 1.5T engine, CVT transmission etc. So we get the same experience our US counterparts get (but at 5x the price). It's super intangible, but that's part of why I like the CRV.

 

But you choose your car that you like and works for you, your family and budget. As long as you're happy with the purchase, I think that matters the most. It's hardly a science. It's all down to personal choice and budget.

Head unit refers to the “ipad-lookalike” thing in the center? I actually find those iPad thingy a bit irritating, would prefer not to have them at all. For rav4 it’s iPad thingy definitely looks uglier than others make. I like crv too (has ruled out cx5 due to smaller 2nd row seat space) but it’s prices it’s quite high and only the 7 seat is worth the price. Maybe can consider glc base model as it is market as 188k at Suntec?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Head unit refers to the âipad-lookalikeâ thing in the center? I actually find those iPad thingy a bit irritating, would prefer not to have them at all. For rav4 itâs iPad thingy definitely looks uglier than others make. I like crv too (has ruled out cx5 due to smaller 2nd row seat space) but itâs prices itâs quite high and only the 7 seat is worth the price. Maybe can consider glc base model as it is market as 188k at Suntec? ð¬

I mean as compared to crv 1.5t which I find it a bit laggish to drive around/casual.

Correct. The Ipad thing in the middle. It's personal choice, but usually the headunit is your interface to the car and it's settings also. Also used for navigation.

 

Singaporean car buyers like features and the lcd headunit makes the car look atas. So I imagine they may not like that aspect.

 

188k is quite a big step up!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The new RAV4 is made in Japan and thus the HU is factory fitted. Asked the SE why don't change the HU to touch screen and he said it's factory fitted in Japan and sayang if replaced with locally fitted touch screen.  :XD:

 

For those who have not seen the showcar, the HU is only a black screen with chrome lined buttons with digital words. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think the rav4 is good value and was somewhat wowed when I was told the price. But I would wait for the higher trim levels first. They only have one trim level that is too basic. Toyota sense is cool. But having old school headunit it is unforgivable for this car. It is silly, but come on!

 

I also agree the CRV 7-seater is pricey, and I justified some of the price difference through lower road tax and insurance.

 

For me, it really came down to intangibles. When a car designer and engineer build a car, they build it holistically around a specific engine, gearbox, chassis and specific success criteria. After they build the 'ideal' version, they create variants with bigger/small engines etc. But it doesn't change the fact that the car was built around a specific drivetrain.

 

I found it harder to justify some models, because SG always gets down-rated versions due to our laws. That is, we always get models where the engine and gearbox was never actually designed for the car in the first place. Cx5 and Rav4 are examples of this, as both were built around 2.5l engines and 6/8 speed gearboxes. In other words, we don't get the experience that the engineer or the designer envisaged. Rather we get a watered down experience.

 

That's partly why I like the CRV. It was always intended to be the 1.5T engine, CVT transmission etc. So we get the same experience our US counterparts get (but at 5x the price). It's super intangible, but that's part of why I like the CRV.

 

But you choose your car that you like and works for you, your family and budget. As long as you're happy with the purchase, I think that matters the most. It's hardly a science. It's all down to personal choice and budget.

 

I totally agree with you. A car is a designed as a package. But then again consumers in Singapore don't think like that. Look at the new Civic FC 1.6L selling and you know locals don't mind an underpowered car with a decade old engine. So as long as consumers continue to be as such cars in Singapore will continue to be as such.

 

Sadly for some people after 10 years they still couldn't have the courage to try something new.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At least the brochure has one interior picture which looks like there is an LCD head unit. There is also a picture with the basic head unit.

 

There is nothing to say that it will be there on the on-sale models. Currently there is only one trim level on sale anyway. More than likely this is the most basic trim, and the higher trims will definitely have it.

2019-Toyota-RAV4-Singapore-Motor-Show-14

2019-Toyota-RAV4-Singapore-Motor-Show-15

2019-Toyota-RAV4-Singapore-Motor-Show-16

2019-Toyota-RAV4-Singapore-Motor-Show-22

2019-Toyota-RAV4-Singapore-Motor-Show-18

2019-Toyota-RAV4-Singapore-Motor-Show-19

2019-Toyota-RAV4-Singapore-Motor-Show-21

  • Praise 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct. The Ipad thing in the middle. It's personal choice, but usually the headunit is your interface to the car and it's settings also. Also used for navigation.

 

Singaporean car buyers like features and the lcd headunit makes the car look atas. So I imagine they may not like that aspect.

 

188k is quite a big step up!

Looking forward to your review on glc haha, u can apply for car editorial work already
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking forward to your review on glc haha, u can apply for car editorial work already

Haha thanks! I'm just a guy that likes cars and glad to share my findings. Though I wouldn't say no to reviewing cars ;).

 

Never tested that range of cars (luxury compact SUV) so can't form an opinion. Though mentioned I'm biased towards BMW, so the X3 would somehow make it out on top for me! But firstly need to receive my new car and pay off my loan on it before I even start considering test driving anything else! Haha.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree with you. A car is a designed as a package. But then again consumers in Singapore don't think like that. Look at the new Civic FC 1.6L selling and you know locals don't mind an underpowered car with a decade old engine. So as long as consumers continue to be as such cars in Singapore will continue to be as such.

 

Sadly for some people after 10 years they still couldn't have the courage to try something new.

I agree. I understand there are limitations from the AD as ultimately everything is dictated by OMV. They need to drive down price to lower the OMV, so put in smaller engine and cheaper gearbox. So although I hate that SG gets watered down versions, I understand why.

 

What I think is inexcusable though is crappy after-sales service, warranty and support. I can't see how dealers in this country make crazy margins on the car (over 100% of omv) yet offer substandard of care. I mean 5 year extended warranty and 3 year servicing shouldn't be promotional. It should be standard, like every other country in the world.

 

I think it's up to the consumer to force these things on the dealers. Set expectations and if the AD can't meet them, then shop elsewhere. That's what I did with TEK. They had a sure win purchase, but were so inflexible around the consumer (E.g I asked to pay more to upgrade rims and they said its not possible) and had substandard warranty, I decided to look at the competition. I wish the average Singaporean car buyer knows they are in the "drivers seats" (pun intended) and fights to increase competition so we all benefit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was quite excited the see the new RAV4, knowing how its probably Toyota's most important global model, together with the Camry. 

 

While the new Camry was a very pleasant surprise, the RAV4 was a very much a disappointment. The active safety features and the price point are positives, but the materials quality and the head unit were obvious letdowns. 

 

It just feels a couple of steps below its main competitors CRV, CX-5, Tiguan/Karoq/Ateca in refinement and build quality, which is very disappointing for a brand new model of such strategic importance to Toyota.

 

In fact, I was in a Proton X70 a short while ago, and frankly, it you covered the badges and did a blind test, the X70 would feel a couple of classes more premium than the RAV4. 

 

And this is from a long time Toyota fan, having owned 2 Camrys in the past...

Edited by Fungyee77
  • Praise 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Was quite excited the see the new RAV4, knowing how its probably Toyota's most important global model, together with the Camry. 

 

While the new Camry was a very pleasant surprise, the RAV4 was a very much a disappointment. The active safety features and the price point are positives, but the materials quality and the head unit were obvious letdowns. 

 

It just feels a couple of steps below its main competitors CRV, CX-5, Tiguan/Karoq/Ateca in refinement and build quality, which is very disappointing for a brand new model of such strategic importance to Toyota.

 

In fact, I was in a Proton X70 a short while ago, and frankly, it you covered the badges and did a blind test, the X70 would feel a couple of classes more premium than the RAV4. 

 

And this is from a long time Toyota fan, having owned 2 Camrys in the past...

 

Toyota needs to replace its team of designers. 

Complacency has set in and they believe that consumers will keep on buying blindly, based on past reputation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Toyota needs to replace its team of designers.

Complacency has set in and they believe that consumers will keep on buying blindly, based on past reputation.

Yeah. Don't disagree.

 

That said, the impressive new Camry and the latest gen of Lexus models shows that there is strong inhouse capability when they apply themselves.

 

Oh well, as long as Rav4 is a top seller globally, I suppose there is no real push to step up the game.

↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...