- 9,884
- Carthage, TN
- race_emhard
GTP Cool Wall: 2013+ Toyota RAV4
- Thread starter White & Nerdy
- 109 comments
- 5,978 views
- 2,153
- Great White North
Yeah. That one too.
- 9,884
- Carthage, TN
- race_emhard
And the Celica in question:
Not much when stock, but they can be pretty awesome when they're not.
Needs to be nominated if it hasn't been polled yet.
Not much when stock, but they can be pretty awesome when they're not.
Needs to be nominated if it hasn't been polled yet.
- 27,203
- United Kingdom
That... somehow that doesn't surprise me.
- 2,153
- Great White North
And the Celica in question:
Not much when stock, but they can be pretty awesome when they're not.
Needs to be nominated if it hasn't been polled yet.
I think the Celica liftback is also cool, but only because it's styled after a fastback Mustang.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Funny thing is I've met republican voters own this and the bigger brother (Sequoia). Once again another stupid opening post from W&N he's clearly trolling, I've saved each OP of his foolish rants and maybe will make a montage of it for the lulz. Most likely not.
- 4,741
- Bogota,Colombia
- GTP_ARP93
This, this, this and that.
I absolutely LOATHE those fat, useless cars they call "crossovers". Get a proper 4X4 SUV off-roader if you need one, if you don't then solve your self-confidence issues and get a damn car or station wagon. They're exclusively driven by soccer moms who believe they need them to feel secure in traffic (even though they've got nothing on a Volvo) and they are repmobiles where I live, driven mostly by the nouveau riche because bigger is better and everyone wants to own a scaled-down version of a narco's Land Cruiser.
Seriously uncool.
Last edited:
- 9,884
- Carthage, TN
- race_emhard
@CarBastard Parents buy them because they are "safer" (which is bullcrap as they have a much higher risk of rollover than a normal car)and they have more space (which is also BS, just buy a Jetta TDI Wagon, whatever the actual name is), and like you said, better visibility, which means that you are now inline with every other SUV driver on the road.
Soft-roaders and the ilk need to go away, people need to buy wagons dammit!
Soft-roaders and the ilk need to go away, people need to buy wagons dammit!
- 4,741
- Bogota,Colombia
- GTP_ARP93
- 6,092
- Phoenix, AZ
I've only somewhat understood the nearly unanimous hate for crossovers. If you look at it through the eyes of a parent who still wants to appear somewhat relevant, it's easier to see the point. It's like the SUV they had ten years ago, but without the choppy ride quality, compromised road manners and middling gas mileage. Instead, they can now have something that somewhat resembles an SUV (the old crossovers were a lot better at this, now most of them look ambiguous), but with driving dynamics (with less emphasis on dynamics) more akin to their old Camcord. It provides them with a raised seating position (it's nice to see over stuff), a comfortable ride and decent fuel economy. It's less useful than a true SUV, but most people didn't need that usefulness. You can throw wagons in their face, but to the majority, there's no getting passed the stigma. Same goes for the infinitely useful minivan, of course.
- 15,460
- Orange County, NY
- GTP_GT916
- Nii916
Uncool, it's boring and ugly.
- 27,203
- United Kingdom
I agree. While I don't find the RAV4, nor any other crossover that immediately springs to mind "cool", some of them are certainly good cars.
Many of them are infinitely more interesting than most wagons too - the Jalopnik thing about manual diesel wagons seems to stem entirely from not being offered such a thing, rather than them actually being interesting, desirable vehicles.
Apart from anything, crossovers seem to be some of the few vehicles that automakers seem to make ride properly at the moment. There's a road near me I regularly drive when I have test cars and it's almost universally awful to drive on in virtually anything I test. Except that many crossovers I've driven sail right over it. Okay, so do some larger 4x4s - but then those use 50% more fuel and barely fit on the driveway.
- 6,041
- Puget Sound
- Crash852
May be very competent, like all other Toyota vehicles, but this certainly isn't cool. Pulling up in one of these makes you look like a soccer mom that wants a cheap "SUV."
W&N's incredibly misinformed and wrong rantings make it so tempting to just vote against what he says, but that's not fair to the car's actual coolness, and I refuse to make the results of the cool wall be about him.
It's a shame that that was never imported to the US. I would love to own something like that.
W&N's incredibly misinformed and wrong rantings make it so tempting to just vote against what he says, but that's not fair to the car's actual coolness, and I refuse to make the results of the cool wall be about him.
I second that motion, with a vengeance!
It's a shame that that was never imported to the US. I would love to own something like that.
- 6,690
- Mexico City
- MoLieG
Yes.
Sub-freaking-zero.
The only thing I don't like about it is the fact they eliminated the V6 engine. Other than that, I'd drive one of these daily and absolutely love every milisecond of it. The engine has a very good response, the transmission is flawless, I love both the exterior and interior (except for the fake carbon fiber), it's comfortable, it has plenty of space & it drives magnificent...
This would be my number one choice for an SUV if the Mercedez Benz GLK didn't exist.
- 3,200
- Murcie LP710
GTP_Ingram
Premium
- 1,916
- London
- GTP_Ingram
- NowtDaft
Not cool until they start building it again like this:
If crossovers can be such a big hit, there's no reason a new convertible Rav4 can be a big hit too.
Personally I think that is a different type of uncool to the regular Rav4 - little open top SUVs remind me of Derek Zoolander, and although he is really, really, really, ridiculously good looking, he's just not as cool as he once was.
- 86,635
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
All of this.
I had this chat with a "all crossovers are rubbish" guy the other day (he drives an Audi A4. His previous cars are 3 Peugeot 306s and an MX-5 that he sold because it was too scary). If you were to give me a company's D-segment saloon or estate and the same company's crossover and tell me it was my only car for the next 3 years*, I'd struggle.
For my money, the best crossover and D-segment family car on the market at the moment, outside the prestige brands, are both made by Mazda - the CX-5 and Mazda 6. The 6 saloon/estate is brilliant, but the CX-5 drives almost exactly as well, gets pretty similar paper fuel economy (real... feh. YMMV, literally), can be used off road and gives a much better view of the road ahead. I'd take either the 6 Tourer or the CX-5 in a heartbeat and regret not picking the other.
The same would apply to Tiguan or Passat, Mondeo or Kuga, CRV or Accord, Qashqai or... oh, wait.
And as an habitual MX-5 driver I love crossovers. Much easier to see under than a family saloon.
*I have two kids and a dog. And we're currently fostering what seems to be a horse with pointy teeth. My ONLY car has to be a FAMILY car.
- 3,155
- 49°16'43.22"N 81°37'50.21W
- mikeybc
Last time I had my pants down and checked I'm not a soccer mom, and I've got more than enough confidence not to give a damn what anyone thinks of me while I drive it. Even with its primitive hydraulic slip-and-go AWD system and 8 inch ground clearance it will go places no FWD or RWD station wagon can dream of going. It's small, good on gas, roomy and every bit as practical if not more than a wagon. And a whole lot easier to get in and out of with a sore back, I dread getting out of our Accord when my back is acting up.
I'm not defending their coolness, (or lack of it) I just don't see how a wagon is better than a crossover, unless you drive around skid pads all day in in perfect weather where it never snows.
I had a much dimmer view of tall vehicles until I became acquainted with people who are only comfortable getting into or out of a taller vehicle because of injury or disability. It makes you think a bit when you look at all those minivans and crossovers on the roads. 👍
With that said, I'm not sure why some crossovers need to be as "thick" as they are. The undersides of bumpers and fenders yawn toward the ground, limiting ground clearance; fatass pillars devour visibility; and in spite of the exterior dimensions there's not always a lot of interior space. Superficially, it seems like inefficient design. Maybe there are reasons for it, but that's what bugs me about them.
I recently spotted a lifted Subaru Outback ('09+) -- which is only pretending to not be a Legacy wagon like all of its predecessors -- and apart from the ballooned length of the BR platform, that suspension kit gave it the most practical proportions of any crossover I've seen. Looking up the numbers, the Outback also sports nearly the same cargo room as the Tribeca (more of a "typical" crossover) but weighs several hundred pounds less, getting better fuel economy.
If a crossover is just a tall wagon, I think they would be better off taking that definition literally: slender dimensions, more ground clearance, more visibility, less weight.
With that said, I'm not sure why some crossovers need to be as "thick" as they are. The undersides of bumpers and fenders yawn toward the ground, limiting ground clearance; fatass pillars devour visibility; and in spite of the exterior dimensions there's not always a lot of interior space. Superficially, it seems like inefficient design. Maybe there are reasons for it, but that's what bugs me about them.
I recently spotted a lifted Subaru Outback ('09+) -- which is only pretending to not be a Legacy wagon like all of its predecessors -- and apart from the ballooned length of the BR platform, that suspension kit gave it the most practical proportions of any crossover I've seen. Looking up the numbers, the Outback also sports nearly the same cargo room as the Tribeca (more of a "typical" crossover) but weighs several hundred pounds less, getting better fuel economy.
If a crossover is just a tall wagon, I think they would be better off taking that definition literally: slender dimensions, more ground clearance, more visibility, less weight.
- 32
- Kiawah Island, South Carolina
Looks terrible. Has relatively no power. Has gotten progressively worse as new generations are built.
Not only is it Seriously Uncool, it's also horrible. It's more pointless than a Prius. At least Prii are somewhat interesting. There's nothing interesting about a RAV4.
The exact same can be said for pretty much any crossover.
Not only is it Seriously Uncool, it's also horrible. It's more pointless than a Prius. At least Prii are somewhat interesting. There's nothing interesting about a RAV4.
The exact same can be said for pretty much any crossover.
- 23,800
- Philippines
As with Famine, I think one of the few crossovers worth its salt is the CX5. Lovely driving dynamics.
One colleague actually likes the way it drives better than the Mazda6, after one gorgeous mountain road blast (officially sanctioned) where they drove the CX5 and Mazda6 back to back. The CX5's extra suspension stroke allows you to push it harder over broken roads, and the progressive valving of the shocks allow you to push deep into a corner, lift off, flick, catch and accelerate out even before most low-slung sedans have finished getting over their jitters from that midcorner bump.
See, a crossover is basically a tall hatchback. Tune it properly, and it will drive like a tall hatchback. A CX5 is nimble, neutral and quite willing to kick the rear end out around the curves. A Mazda6 is fast, grippy and very tactile, but it's a big sedan, and has more natural understeer than a CX5.
-
HERE'S where it gets interesting. We do performance testing here every year. Which means I get to do this:
...with tall crossovers. And hatchbacks. And sedans.
The RAV4 is not only (slightly) faster in a straight line than the CX-5, it also slaloms faster. And faster than some sedans, too. A RAV4 is more practical than a Camry, handles better, has more interior room and much sharper looks. The Camry is a dumpy hippo in comparison.
And the RAV4 isn't even as eco-hippie green as the Corvette (which has an intergalactic cruising gear and cylinder deactivation... the RAV4 doesn't).
It's still not quite cool.
Not because it pretends at anything, because, with the un-butch bodywork, lack of knobbly tires or pretend off-road looks (think H2 or Jeep Compass), it doesn't pretend to be anything.
It's not cool because it's a RAV4. If it were a three-door first-gen convertible, which is better in the snow or sand than you might think... it might just be.
One colleague actually likes the way it drives better than the Mazda6, after one gorgeous mountain road blast (officially sanctioned) where they drove the CX5 and Mazda6 back to back. The CX5's extra suspension stroke allows you to push it harder over broken roads, and the progressive valving of the shocks allow you to push deep into a corner, lift off, flick, catch and accelerate out even before most low-slung sedans have finished getting over their jitters from that midcorner bump.
See, a crossover is basically a tall hatchback. Tune it properly, and it will drive like a tall hatchback. A CX5 is nimble, neutral and quite willing to kick the rear end out around the curves. A Mazda6 is fast, grippy and very tactile, but it's a big sedan, and has more natural understeer than a CX5.
-
HERE'S where it gets interesting. We do performance testing here every year. Which means I get to do this:
...with tall crossovers. And hatchbacks. And sedans.
The RAV4 is not only (slightly) faster in a straight line than the CX-5, it also slaloms faster. And faster than some sedans, too. A RAV4 is more practical than a Camry, handles better, has more interior room and much sharper looks. The Camry is a dumpy hippo in comparison.
And the RAV4 isn't even as eco-hippie green as the Corvette (which has an intergalactic cruising gear and cylinder deactivation... the RAV4 doesn't).
It's still not quite cool.
Not because it pretends at anything, because, with the un-butch bodywork, lack of knobbly tires or pretend off-road looks (think H2 or Jeep Compass), it doesn't pretend to be anything.
It's not cool because it's a RAV4. If it were a three-door first-gen convertible, which is better in the snow or sand than you might think... it might just be.
- 4,209
- Wasilla, AK
That's the problem. They're tall. A tall car can feel like driving a bus after a while, like you don't want to make any fast moves because the whole thing just might tip over.
- 23,800
- Philippines
What part of the car is tall? The engine? The transmission? The drivetrain? No? Where is all that stuff?
Why... it's down near the ground, just as it is with a sedan.
A crossover (as opposed to an SUV) is basically a hatchback with a few inches added to the roof.
All the heavy parts are near the ground.
Hell, our CRV is useless in a flood because the engine and intake snorkel are at exactly the same height as they would be in a Civic or an Accord.
But, the CR-V is infinitely more useful than an Accord, because it has a bigger trunk, it's easier to step into (instead of falling into it, you simply walk up to the seat and sit down) and the loading lip of the trunk means you can load a big pallet of goods or an AC unit without having to bend over and strain your back trying to lift a sixty pound item out of the trunk (not that an AC will fit through an Accord's trunk opening... or even fit over the full-sized spare).
A good crossover, (CX-5, Subaru XV) except for one or two inches of extra ground clearance, drives exactly like a hatchback. Which already drives better than a sedan. So these things pretty much cancel each other out. Like I've said... I can feint drift a CX-5 all day long. Attempt the same thing in a Mazda6 and that big, low and stiff rear end can sometimes come out suddenly enough that you'll run out of space to catch it. (not tried that with the current one, but I have done it a few times on track with the second-gen car, which had too much rear grip to do it safely... the first-generation, however, was fantastic for that kind of stuff)
Now, an SUV like the Grand Cherokee, with its extra tall suspension, high-mounted engine and engine accessories (for better flood fording), and etcetera, that is prone to tipping over. The Grand Cherokee has great handling for a big vehicle, and very grippy tires, but it puts so much pressure on the outside front in a turn that it blows it out during the Moose test.
