Toyota RAV4 Forums banner
1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
This post outlines my reasons for buying a nice used 2009 RAV4 V6 AWD Sport. I've posted my progress on other forums (primary Hyundai and Subaru), but stopped when I took their cars out of consideration.

My priorities:
* Seat comfort
* Cost (most likely will buy used)
* Headroom

Lesser priorities:
* Quiet cabin
* Performance
* Brand reliability

With a subscription to Consumer Reports as my guide, I test drove or sat in over a dozen cars before settling on a used 2009 RAV4. Those included new or old models of the Nissan Murano & Rogue, Ford Edge, Mazda CX5, RAV4, Venza, Outback, Forester, CRV, Volvo XC60, Acura MDX, Lexus RX, VW Tiguan and Hyundai Santa Fe Sport.

I'm 6'4" 190 pounds. Some people with my height have long legs and some have long torsos. I apparently ended up with both. My current car is a 2006 Camry LE V6 which I love. However at the time, the only reason I didn't get the XLE (because I wanted the leather) was because it automatically came with a sunroof. I never fit in cars with sunroofs. Apparently that extra 1-1.5 inches matter a lot.

Here are my notes:

Subaru Outback: My #1 choice. I wanted to like this car more than any other. It would have solved all my problems since it could replace both my Camry and need for more cargo space. I even fit in it with a sunroof! Had a beautiful interior. Spacious. Would have bought a 2013-2014 in a H6 since CVT's don't really float my boat. But alas, the seats were a back killer in both generations. Pain in my legs and lower back regardless of how I adjusted the lumbar, so I couldn't get it. The newest gen had a lumbar that was too pronounced even when rolled all the way back. I can't fault Subaru completely though. It seems ALL manufacturers have gone off their rocker and produce overly hard seats these days. Give me my old 1998 Camry seats back!! Soft and cushy.

Subaru Forester: Fairly basic interior, but good visibility. However, with nothing else magnificent about it, I could get the same interior with a RAV4 or Honda CRV and wouldn't need to worry about that boxer engine or CVT, so not enough pros vs the cons.

Nissans: Something strange about them. The looks, the windows..made me feel closed in. Engine performance sucked. Rear seats of the Rogue could not fit an adult. I had to duck to get in the back seat, and I have parents who are tall. Great electronics and gadgets though. Crappy CVT trans. It did have good seats up front though. For all the pros of the Outback, I could have put up with a CVT there, but not the Nissans.

Ford Edge: If money were no object, I would have bought this and put up with the only major flaw - that funky Infotainment system. It was complicated enough that a driver futzing with it could cause a crash! The seats were great, quiet cabin, decent performance. Nice car. However, the cost of admission was $35K and I wouldn't want to buy a used Ford without some kind of warranty. I shouldn't have been looking at it anyway, but didn't really like the Escape.

Mazda CX5: Outside of the Outback, the second car I REALLY wanted to like initially before doing any driving. Sporty, good looks, okay seats. Couldn't get a sunroof cuz of my height. Problem was it was too loud and the engine didn't match the rest of it's sportiness. Good MPG. Of course I'm going to make a hypocrite of myself since I picked a fairly loud used RAV4, but that was also much cheaper than a new CX5. Also, the NEW 2015 CX5's had some extra sound insulation added, not that you could tell. Makes me wonder how bad the earlier ones were, so I didn't even bother testing them. Will keep the 2015+ CX5's on my list for a future used car though.

New RAV4: Didn't wow me. Not sure why. Seemed too much $$ for what we got. Cost more than the competition too. I didn't give it a fair chance though. I was in my "lets try something other than Toyota for a change" mode.

Honda CRV: Didn't fit in the new ones. Tried a 2011 (last gen) because I like the looks and they didn't start sloping the windows down to kill visibility until the newest gen (although most manufacturers are guilty of that). Seats were WAY too hard. Had back problems within 10 minutes. Gone.

Volvo: Sat in every Volvo in the dealer showroom. Nice seats!..but that's what they are known for. But being a premium brand, all had sunroofs, and none of them fit me in the headroom. Back seats were surprisingly small too. Funny considering these cars are designed by tall white Swedish people. With the iffy reliability these days and the high-cost of ownership, even for a used one, I took it off my list. I was more curious since I was running out of options and people kept recommending them. 'Them Volvo owners are as loyal as the Subaru ones.

Toyota Venza: Didn't even pay attention to this model until I found it on Toyota's web site. Could this be the Toyota alternative to the Outback? Seemed too good to be true. Despite what others say, I loved the quirky interior. Loved the cargo space in the back. Known good V6 engine option. What killed it were those seats, and it drove like a loud truck. 20" wheels! By making those seats overly wide, they ended up being too flat and painful. Ugh! Damn you Toyota and Subaru!

Acura MDX and Lexus RX350, used: These were more of a curiosity, so I just sat in them. Nice interiors, plush. Probably would have been a quiet ride and definitely would have had the engine. But even used, a high cost of ownership. The killer was they ALL come with sunroofs which didn't have enough head clearance. Couldn't buy it if I wanted to.

VW: Hard seats. Didn't go any further. Didn't really want a VW anyway.

Santa Fe Sport: If money were no object, would have been a second option over the Ford Edge. Good seats, quiet ride, killer electronics, etc. Would get the fabulous warranty too. Would have to buy new to get the exact set of options I needed though in order to eliminate the sunroof. It wouldn't have worked. I'll keep my eyes on this one for a future used car. I assume the Hyundai will last longer past 100K miles than any Ford.

Didn't even consider BMW or Mercedes. I couldn't afford the cost of ownership, so I didn't want to disappoint myself if I ended up loving them and didn't want to just lead sales people on for no reason.

Due to an aversion of Chevy & GM, I did not try Chevy Equinox, GMC Terrain or Buick Encore/Enclave, but would have if I ran out of (preferred) foreign options. No doubt most of the American cars would have fulfilled my requirement for a nice interior and seats, but at the cost of projected longevity. I've been bit by Buick and Pontiac before in the past. I feel bad I didn't try a 2014 Kia Sorento. It may also have been perfect based upon what I read. (Not a year before, not a year after. Just a 2014). It supposedly would have checked off all my requirements based on specs and user reviews.

My plan initially was going to trade in my 2006 Camry but as I drove more and more, I realized no CUV had a ride as good as a sedan (except maybe the luxury ones) so this purchase was going to become a second car for me. It was going to "act" as my truck for moving stuff, which made creature comforts and the need for something brand new less important.

So I ended up buying a very used Toyota 2009 RAV4 V6 Sport with 98K miles - a far cry away from where I started. But at only $13K, it allowed me to keep my Camry which made me happy. I just changed around my entire thinking and decided...WHY NOT?! Why can't I own two cars? Granted I'll have more problems down the road, but two used Toyotas are still better than one new GM car. :) Being AWD, it can also be my primary winter car to give my Camry a break.

The 2009 RAV4 had good seats, although getting one with a manual seat meant I don't get lumbar support. Still, good seats. I'll buy a pillow or something if I need it. It has LOTS of headroom, so much that I could get a sunroof! Not that I need one, but it makes me happy since I was denied it for so long. The performance is what sold me on the V6 though. Knowing that all future CUV's would probably only get a 4-cylinder due to the new regulations, I figure I'd jump on one now. WOW, this thing is a rocket. Makes it a fun car to drive too. I love the look without the tire on the back, and prefer the side opening door. Being so tall, either I'd hit my chin on a top opening door one of these days, or I'd have to duck under it every time I want to load something.

Downsides? Not a quiet cabin;, and I think I have that infamous tranny noise. I'll take it in to a dealer and see if they can fix it. I've already researched posts here about people who have sound insulated their cabins. I may attempt that in the spring, especially now since I kept my Camry and have the time to make this a project car. The radio also sucks, but being a fairly normal footprint I should be able to swap that out easily for something that'll work with my iPhone USB too. I think the biggest problem is the speakers are in the door instead of the dash. 'Not sure if even better speakers could overcome that design flaw. My feet don't have ears.

So after 3 weeks of intense looking, after wanting to buy a new CUV and getting sticker shock along the way (and disappointment in many car seats), I end up with something slightly newer than what I already have. Hopefully by the time one or both of these cars die, I'll have more used options that fit me. I have a couple above I could consider in a few years, so my "research" may pay off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,969 Posts
I'm 6'7 and have oodles of head room even with the sunroof in our 2009. Only modern car I've had headroom issues with is the CR-Z.

Legroom though is another matter. In the RAV my knee is jammed up against the center console. Not comfortable on long drives at all. Half way through our cross country drive I just wanted to cut a notch in it for my knee.

But the Rav is meant to be for my wife. Now that we're settled in after moving I'm doing my own shopping. I'm settling on a VW Golf primarily because it fits me so well.

One curious note. We moved from the flat cornfields of Ohio to the mountains of Washington/Oregon. Have been doing a lot more city and mountainous driving...but our gas mileage is going up. Can't really explain that. Most likely higher average speeds in Ohio since there's less traffic and you get everywhere with the highway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I'm 6'7 and have oodles of head room even with the sunroof in our 2009. Only modern car I've had headroom issues with is the CR-Z.

Legroom though is another matter. In the RAV my knee is jammed up against the center console.
Sounds like you are more legs than torso. I wear 34-35 pants, but it does come close. Are you a 36+ inseam? That inch matters (like it does for my head!).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,969 Posts
Yeah I need a 36" inseam or else I'm wearing highwaters. Though a 38 would have my heels walking on them.

How reclined are you in your normal sitting position? I do naturally tend to that 135 degree position. Especially so in sportier cars. The Rav seems more oriented at an upright position though. If I sat up 90 degrees I'd definitely have more headroom issues. Even though with my height and that recline it can mean I'm looking out a rear window rather than the driver's window when I turn my head heh.


How your commute is killing you: Infographic | MNN - Mother Nature Network
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,505 Posts
You have to test drive the vehicle to know if it fits.
I don't think the seats are real leather. I found them
uncomfortable but with a set of Wet Okole covers
all was good again. The folks there are very good
and will likely call you if there is any question
whatsoever.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Yeah I need a 36" inseam or else I'm wearing highwaters. Though a 38 would have my heels walking on them.

How reclined are you in your normal sitting position? I do naturally tend to that 135 degree position. Especially so in sportier cars. The Rav seems more oriented at an upright position though.
I'm a typical 110 degrees I think. I don't have a protractor handy. Whatever "normal" is, like a back seat angle. Anything like that 135 degree angle would be bad for your tailbone and hurt in other ways.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
#valnar regarding the Forester, you said "wouldn't need to worry about that boxer engine or CVT"... I'm curious why you see the boxer engine and the CVT as negatives. I bought a 2015 CVT Forester in April after comparing it to all the competition. I was VERY impressed with that transmission for many reasons. MPG was outstanding! Even though I really liked it and would recommend the CVT Forester to all, I just traded it in on a manual transmission just because I didn't like feeling disconnected from the driving experience. As for the boxer engine, other than noise on acceleration, which sounds kinda cool to me, I don't see any down side. Anyway, since the Forester is really still new to me, I'm wondering if you didn't like the CVT and boxer engine as a matter of personal preference, or some tech/mechanical issues I don't know about?

PS: I do agree that the Forester is very basic. It reminds me of the first generation rav4 with more hp :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
I have mechanic friends who have nothing nice to say about a CVT transmission, and it does feel kind of funny as you noticed. Although they may also not like them because you can't "work on them". Either they work, or they don't and you replace it.

I don't consider the Boxer a sound design for reasons I won't go into here. But using an empirical answer to your question, if they were so good, why wouldn't everyone use them?

The major oil burning issues of the Subaru engines during the year models I would be looking at worried me the most. That and the windshield cracking issues. It just sounded like too much to worry about if I bought used. I could have swung a new Forester (w warranty) if I had to, but it didn't wow me enough to take the plunge.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,969 Posts
CVTs are a cardinal sin against car enthusiast kind.

The Forester XT with a manual transmission is a fun drive though.

I loved my Legacy GT Spec B. It was an 07 and didn't burn a drop of oil between changes and needed nothing but regular maintenance. Kind of like an STI in more grown up clothing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,969 Posts
They are more expensive to build and more difficult to service(i.e. spark plugs).

But there are definite advantages like the lower center of gravity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
And after all that, I'm back to square one. I'm returning the RAV4. It has the infamous transmission whine noise that is piercing to me and it's a $6000 fix out of warranty. Fortunately the dealer will take it back.

I really liked the car otherwise. If I do decide to buy it again, It'll have to be a 2011-2012 that's still under warranty, or one with the new fixed transmission.
:crying
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,447 Posts
And after all that, I'm back to square one. I'm returning the RAV4. It has the infamous transmission whine noise that is piercing to me and it's a $6000 fix out of warranty. Fortunately the dealer will take it back.

I really liked the car otherwise. If I do decide to buy it again, It'll have to be a 2011-2012 that's still under warranty, or one with the new fixed transmission.
:crying
I got a 2010 that is fully warrantied til sometime in mid 2017...51k and no whine...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
The only ones I can find are very far away. Far enough that I might have to fly there and drive it home. I'm only willing to do that for a RAV4 under warranty, original or certified.

The bigger question is, can I get new transmission changed under warranty for that noise?
 

·
Your Humble Administrator
2008 RAV4 Limited V6
Joined
·
16,930 Posts
The bigger question is, can I get new transmission changed under warranty for that noise?
The answer is YES, as long as the original power train warranty is still in effect, or it's covered by a certified or extended warranty.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,969 Posts
Yeah, when we picked out our 2009 last year(from the Cleveland area actually) the transmission replacement was listed on the carfax so we knew it had been done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
The answer is YES, as long as the original power train warranty is still in effect, or it's covered by a certified or extended warranty.
I was being given a hard time on this 2009 because it was not a "defect" per se, although it was also out of warranty too. Just wanted to make sure I'd be covered. Can I simply request it to be replaced, or does it have to exhibit the symptom? My luck is it would only show up after the warranty expired.

So 5 years or 60K miles, whichever comes first...or one that's Certified? That'll narrow down my search a bit.


I'm basically looking for my perfect RAV4 (again) and am running out of time to find those parameters on a 2011-2012. If I have to fly somewhere to pick one up and drive it home, I will, but I won't be able to take it back to the dealer if there is a problem so I have to know I'm covered!
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top