[05RAV]

I looked for close to three years for a manual RAV4.2 for sale. Exceedingly rare. I'm jealous

Interestingly, the 4AT has a lower first gear, but the ratio gap between each subsequent gear is just awful. I cringe a little bit reading these posts of larger tire installations on RAVs with the automatic, but I have little doubt the 5MT can row 225/75-16's quite nicely

 

[05RAV]

I deleted the content due to too many errors. Continued below . . .

 

[05RAV]

Great, that's nice to know. I'll do that and repost.

Those 4.93s would be sweet. I wish I could find some interchangeability with RAV4 gear ratios, being stuck with the OEM garbage is painful. The benefit of having lower gear ratios, as you know, is running larger tires at a 4.93 ratio gains you back some highway efficiency without loosing too much torque on the bottom.

 

[05RAV]

Thanks Commando, that makes a big difference!

Basically, the manual does everything better.

I'm confused though, why the E359F is regarded as yielding poorer city mileage and greater highway efficiency, despite having more gear reduction everywhere? My intuition would be the opposite is true.

 

[05RAV]

I think what makes the difference is the engine... 2.0L vs 2.4L.

Would be the case if the mileage discrepancy was a 2001-2003, but the E359F is driven by the 2.4L.

 

[05RAV]

I see you guys mentioned that this was a 5 speed with this tires, are there any reasons not to use these tires on an automatic?

Just to be absolutely clear, what the graphs I shared with Commando's help show, is that the 5-spd manual transmission turns 225/75-16s with greater authority (more mechanical advantage) than does the automatic with the smaller 235/60s. This is quite simply, huge. I haven't done the math, but some members here use 235/70s and it looks like this large of tire may still perform like the OE tire when equipped with the automatic.

If I ever find a 5-spd with low mileage, I'll be buying my third RAV4.2.