maybe there will be3 a V6 in 2013

[Freedom55]

Originally Posted by JuneBug

Last I heard, the V6 only accounted for about 30% of RAV4 sales. I'm sure that had something to do with it.

Civic Coupe and Accord Coupe account for a similar percentage but Honda still continues to make them...to my girlfriend's delight as she will eventually change her 2008 Civic Coupe. I'm not saying Honda does everything right, they never offered a V6 or a turbo in the CRV and they are expecting their "loyal" customers to move up to a Pilot or Acura RDX, a risky business in my opinion and Toyota is now doing the exact same thing...move up to a Highlander/Venza or Lexus RX350 for more power. As I said in another post, there is competition out there from the Koreans and the Americans but I'm so thrilled with my 2012 "dragster" that I want to keep it for a long time Then again, the used market will probably boom, a plus for us V6 owners.

I've been in sales all my life and if you don't take care of your customers, someone else will. Hopefully, Toyota will come with either an optional engine or an improved version of the actual 2.5 mill. With direct injection and some fine tuning they could easily pump out well over 200HP from the 2.7, more like 230HP. My 2010 Rondo came with an antiquated 2.7 V6 which was putting out 192HP and it was quite torquey as well.

[doane2u]

Not a V6, but maybe another alternative for a fast, fun to drive RAV4? (click here)

[Rav4en33]

Toyota really needs to re-offer a V6 option in 2014 or 2015!

[DVS]

Originally Posted by Rav4en33

Toyota really needs to re-offer a V6 option in 2014 or 2015!

Like the rest of the 4.4 RAV4, they'll probably just do what everybody else has already done.

In this case that would be to offer a turbo 4-cylinder as an alternate engine.

Me too, Toyota. Me too.

Hopefully it won't require premium gas, and yet will still have the same life expectancy and be as trouble-free as a naturally aspirated engine. If anyone could pull that off, it would probably be Toyota.

Only time will tell.

[Blogson]

Toyota basically has joined the Honda CR-V crowd. With CAFE requirements and Toyota's apparent strategy to force V6 buyers to get the pricier Highlander the V6 for the RAV4 is dead and buried. Toyota also quoted low sales figures for the RAV4 V6, but in my area it appears that about half of the RAV4s are V6 models.

[blackdograv]

The low sales retort from Toyota is pure BS. They sold plenty of them. Since the engine is already existing and fully functional, they don't even have to make an investment. They just say " if we sell this many, we need to charge this much more for the V6 " Simple economics. By their logic they shouldn't sell any limited models with tow packages because they represent only 20% of sales.

[DVS]

It seems obvious to me that the lack of a V6 / the inability to tow anything heavier than a Radio Flyer in the 2013 RAV4 is purely an attempt to increase Highlander sales. Toyota representatives practically said exactly that at the 2012 L.A. Auto Show.

Toyota knows full well how to get a good V6 package into a vehicle. They have simply chosen not to offer anything like that for the 2013 RAV4, in addition to the mommy-mobile versions being offered.

However, the Highlander is significantly more expensive than the RAV4. At least on the upper end you'll pay about 30% more for a Highlander than a RAV4 V6.

So...we're supposed to pay a lot more to get back that functionality (power, towing, 3rd row, etc.), and on top of that deal with a vehicle that is bigger, heavier, harder to park and gets noticeably worse mileage?

Really?

As much as I love Toyota, if I were in the market next year, knowing what I know about the 2013 RAV4, I would absolutely check out other manufacturers first, probably starting with Subaru.

For me, brand loyalty does NOT justify the significant purchase cost increase and cost of ownership increase for desired functionality offered by other manufacturers in a package similar to the RAV4 V6 that can be delivered by them at a significantly lower price than for the Highlander, both up front and ongoing.

One would think a high percentage of other future "RAV4 V6" customers would feel the same way. It will be very interesting to see if the configurations of RAV4 V6 competitors (those compact SUV configurations with more power/towing ability similar to the RAV4 V6) increase in numbers of units sold next year more than any increase in Highlander numbers of units sold.

If that happens, it will also be very interesting to see what, if anything, Toyota chooses to do about that.

[dexterdog]

Originally Posted by DVS

It seems obvious to me that the lack of a V6 / the inability to tow anything heavier than a Radio Flyer in the 2013 RAV4 is purely an attempt to increase Highlander sales. Toyota representatives practically said exactly that at the 2012 L.A. Auto Show.

My thoughts exactly. Cafe standards have less to do with it since a 4 cylinder would still be in the model lineup. The cost to implement two engine choices in a new design that is battling in a segment filled with 4 cylinders is not very practical anymore. I would say the V6 is gone from the RAV4 for good.

[NLRAV]

Originally Posted by dexterdog

The cost to implement two engine choices in a new design that is battling in a segment filled with 4 cylinders is not very practical anymore.

Not sure manufacturing cost has a lot to do with it. The new RAV4 is offered with 2.0 and 2.5 litre gasoline engines and with 2.0 and 2.2 litre turbodiesel engines. It's just that not every country gets every engine. Western Europe gets 2.0 gasoline, 2.0 and 2.2 turbodiesel. Eastern Europe gets 2.0 and 2.5 gasoline, I believe. Australia gets 2.5 gasoline and 2.2 turbodiesel. Of course the US/North American (possibly South America too) cars are built in Canada in a single plant which may make it cheaper to produce a rav4 with just one engine (the Woodstock plant only produces the RAV4). But it seems dificult to imagine that an engine option really makes a big difference to manufacturing costs. The other plants (that produce for europe, asia and austrialia/nz) don't seem to have that problem (not sure one plant produces all 4 engines). But perhaps they also assemble other models which share those engines with the rav4.
The decision to drop the V6 seems to be a marketing choice. Towing capacity is a little vague. I can tow 2000kg with my 2.0 gasoline MT. With an auto that would be 1500kg. Diesels (2.2) can tow a minimum of 1800kg. ANd 1kg = 2.2 pounds so.... minimum of 3300lbs (assumes a trailer with brakes). Again this seems to be a marketing choice. Perhaps some legal aspects. But if less and less people went for the V6 (enthousiasts are overrepresented on this forum hence the V6 bias), Toyota made the right choice dropping the V6. The trend is towards 4 cylinder turbo engines anyway, even in a lot of BMW's. In theory, these offer better fuel economy. In practise they don't. But the torque is nice (reliability is less nice).

[289fia]

Toyota "forcing" buyers to go to a Highlander rather than a V6 equipped Rav4 - seems to be missing the "desired product". All Highlanders are "3 row seating", virtual mini-vans. Big, bulky. I wanted a smaller, somewhat powerful (to tow 3500 lbs), 2 row seat "somewhat utility vehicle". So I went with a 2012 V6 Rav4. There were no really attractive alternatives out there. Ford Edge? Subaru Forester /outback won't tow 3500 Lbs. After they confirmed the 2013 is a "CRV copy", I stopped by the local Toyota dealer and picked up a base, with an upgrade package, + tow prep and OEM hitch. Done.