Toyota RAV4 Forums banner

661 - 680 of 1729 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
114 Posts
Where are you located. When I bought my ICE end of July, the dealer had exactly 1 hybrid - and 30+ ICE models. The other dealer in town - even more ICE, no Hybrids. I asked the sales person i bought mine from almost in passing and he said He had not seen one discounted at all yet. Might be worth someone travelling your way.
Boston, MA
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
463 Posts
You see, I find this more hard to believe because all the local dealers around me still has plenty of 2019 hybrids in stock. Now granted, maybe these hybrids aren't the most desirable as far as options go? I don't know. Our family was able to buy a 19 Hybrid LE for 15% off MSRP. To me, that doesn't seem like a car that is in super high demand as stated.
It is a regional thing. Some areas like yours have plenty but many regions have few if any in stock. I was at our dealer a couple of days ago having my other vehicle serviced. I walked their lot. They had 9 Rav4s one of which was a hybrid. The previous time I was there they had 16 ravs but only one hybrid. They are selling well here in Colorado.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
174 Posts
For what it's worth I typically have had good luck using TrueCar to establish a rough estimate on what most people are paying, and then I'll have the TrueCar dealerships compete with each other with offers, and then I'll take that quote to other nearby dealers that don't participate with TrueCar. My local Honda dealer beat the best "TC Dealer" price by a couple thousand for the trim I wanted for our Pilot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
The new Tech has hit a kind of plateau I think . Plenty of Sensors and and safety features that are now standard fair.
The radar cruise control used to be a 2k feature on BMW's and the keyless entry is still 500 or more . Until there is self
driving and sat internet robo cars things should be stable for awhile. Although I am envious of these features I feel no rush to buy a car solely on the basis of getting these.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
484 Posts
This is why we are planning to buy a RAV4 Prime. We have owned one Toyota -- a 2003 Highlander AWD V6 that is still running well. It's a pretty spartan vehicle -- not at all enjoyable for out-of-town trips. But until the last couple of years, I don't think we spent more than about $1000 on repairs outside of routine maintenance. Really, really dependable. Toyota gets a lot of mileage of out that, and people are willing to overlook some of the crap that comes with Toyotas (including their horrible infotainment system, still -- though our 2003 Highlander has none). We have always bought cars to last a long time (in addition to our 2003 Highlander that my wife drives daily with 220k miles on it, we have a 2001 Volvo wagon with 240k miles on it that runs well still). But now I think that our decades-long tradition of holding cars for many years/miles will be coming to an end. It's hard to even see keeping a RAV4 Prime beyond Toyota's measly 3-year warranty period, because of the complexity in PHEV systems -- though hopefully the relative dependability of the Prius Prime will translate into good reliability in the RAV4 Prime also (it's again part of the reason that we're going in this direction). Too many exciting advances coming in the auto industry, also, will keep us from keeping cars for 10-15 years now. I'll be surprised if we don't own a BEV in five years, but we'll also retain at least one vehicle with an ICE (probably a PHEV) for those long-distance road trips.

That said, we'll go for the lower trim level of the RAV4 Prime, and we may not take the plunge on it if we can't buy it from a dealership for $40k or less prior to tax/rebate incentives. I just can't see paying more than about $32k for a Toyota; I'd rather move into something a little more fun and nice inside, in the lower luxury market, if I'm going to spend more than that for a Toyota. I suspect that Toyota understands this, and I don't see them charging over $40k for the lower trim, and in fact think they'll come in around $35k-$38k for that.
I think you're selling the warranty period short here. Toyota offers a 3 year/36k miles comprehensive warranty, but the entire powertrain is covered for 5 year/60k miles (which, I'll admit, is far too low considering Toyota's history of reliability) but the hybrid components are covered for even longer: 8 years/100k miles, and the battery is covered for 10 years/150k miles.

Hybrids introduce additional complexity, that's true. But the components themselves are pretty reliable. And, at least with Toyota's "Hybrid Synergy Drive," some things have been simplified. For example, the transmission (one of the more complex, problematic, and expensive parts of an ICE car) is reduced to just a single planetary gearset and a couple other gears. No solenoids, no clutches, no CVT belts, no torque converter, and on and on.

This. I find that disappointing as well. I don't want the SE and XSE trim levels at all. I'm considering a RAV4 Hybrid LE or XLE.
I completely agree. Not only that, but the SE is more similar to the Hybrid XSE level in features, so it's even higher than the names suggest at first.

My hope is that this will be like the 2016 RAV4 Hybrid, which was only sold in the XLE and Limited. In the following model years they introduced other trims, including the LE. My guess is that they'll do the same with the Prime and introduce other trims in 2022. I suspect that they got to 302 hp mainly by beefing up the rear motor -- an XLE or LE (and possibly Limited) trim would revert back to the current rear motor (so they're not as "sporty"). But the XLE will be similar to the current Limited in features, while the LE would be like the current XLE. I wouldn't hold my breath for an actual current LE equivalent in the Prime (maybe eventually they could do an "L Eco" trim like the Prius has?).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
174 Posts
I agree, in terms of engineering, I think the Toyota Planetary CVT is the best CVT around. Subaru's is pretty good, but the planetary system has next to zero wear and tear from an engineering standpoint... the Subaru one does have some points of failure... specifically when the pulley fails, the whole system grenades... but it's still light years better than the Nissan garbage they had (that was a big problem for them...) ... Subaru's CVT is a steel chain like a heavy-duty bike pulley. They're really solid, but it seems that the valve body, specifically the solenoids, tend to fail after 10 years of service. They can't replace single solenoids, so they have to replace the entire valve body as of now. This may change in the future, of course. They used to not fix failed valve bodies at all and required a full CVT replacement.

My biggest issue with the Subaru CVT is that they dont want you to change your fluid, ever. Never, ever. I'd be more comfortable even with a 100k interval here. It's just too expensive of a part to fail, and no fluid lasts forever try as they might.

Does the planetary CVT from Toyota require any fluid changes?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
463 Posts
I agree, in terms of engineering, I think the Toyota Planetary CVT is the best CVT around. Subaru's is pretty good, but the planetary system has next to zero wear and tear from an engineering standpoint... the Subaru one does have some points of failure... specifically when the pulley fails, the whole system grenades... but it's still light years better than the Nissan garbage they had (that was a big problem for them...) ... Subaru's CVT is a steel chain like a heavy-duty bike pulley. They're really solid, but it seems that the valve body, specifically the solenoids, tend to fail after 10 years of service. They can't replace single solenoids, so they have to replace the entire valve body as of now. This may change in the future, of course. They used to not fix failed valve bodies at all and required a full CVT replacement.

My biggest issue with the Subaru CVT is that they dont want you to change your fluid, ever. Never, ever. I'd be more comfortable even with a 100k interval here. It's just too expensive of a part to fail, and no fluid lasts forever try as they might.

Does the planetary CVT from Toyota require any fluid changes?
Toyota considers the eCVT fluid to be "lifetime" but it is an easy and inexpensive change so it is up to the owner to do it or have it done. There has been a gigantic amount of discussion at PriusChat about this with some thinking it is crazy not to do it and others never doing it. The fluid is standard transmission fluid,

I'm in the never camp because most Toyota hybrid owners don't go to forums to read about it and therefore do nothing, yet Toyota hybrid planetary eCVT failure is extremely rare. I do accept that changing the fluid can bring cheap peace of mind.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
484 Posts
I agree, in terms of engineering, I think the Toyota Planetary CVT is the best CVT around. Subaru's is pretty good, but the planetary system has next to zero wear and tear from an engineering standpoint... the Subaru one does have some points of failure... specifically when the pulley fails, the whole system grenades... but it's still light years better than the Nissan garbage they had (that was a big problem for them...) ... Subaru's CVT is a steel chain like a heavy-duty bike pulley. They're really solid, but it seems that the valve body, specifically the solenoids, tend to fail after 10 years of service. They can't replace single solenoids, so they have to replace the entire valve body as of now. This may change in the future, of course. They used to not fix failed valve bodies at all and required a full CVT replacement.

My biggest issue with the Subaru CVT is that they dont want you to change your fluid, ever. Never, ever. I'd be more comfortable even with a 100k interval here. It's just too expensive of a part to fail, and no fluid lasts forever try as they might.

Does the planetary CVT from Toyota require any fluid changes?
Just about everybody is claiming "lifetime fluids" for transmissions, including Toyota.

Sorry, rant incoming.

This is a seriously frustrating thing in the industry right now. On the one hand you have traditionalists who insist on sticking with the service intervals manufacturers suggested over 20 years ago. They do oil changes every 3k miles (sometimes more often), even with synthetic fluids. Some insist on doing transmission fluid every 10k or 15k. After all, replacing them too often doesn't hurt anything, right? It's cheap insurance!

Then you get news reports about untrustworthy mechanics and dealerships, who scam their customers into getting services they simply don't need. You want to trust your mechanic, but they have a profit motive in getting you to "over service" your vehicle (making money from the service itself, and from any follow-on repairs that they can catch). Instead, they tell you to look at your owner's manual: the manufacturer will tell you exactly how often to change that oil and what services may or may not be needed regularly.

So then you go to the manual and see that the manufacturer recommends 10k intervals for the oil and lifetime for the transmission, differentials, etc. Some things are only every 100k, like spark plugs. And so you think that wow, you don't really have to do much preventative maintenance at all with cars anymore.

But then people start pointing out that dealerships have the opposite profit motive: if the car breaks down you have to buy another one to replace it. They just want to claim long service intervals so you think the car is easier to maintain, but it's not. The standard line is that "lifetime" really means "for the warranty period" since after that the manufacturer is off the hook.

And so we're left in a stupid situation, where nobody can agree on what the right service intervals are. Who can you trust, here? I don't want to do any more maintenance than I need to: it's a waste of time, money, effort, and resources. But I also want to drive my car for 200k or more, if possible. And despite what others might claim about nefarious motives, there's also reasons in the other direction: some mechanics might want your car to have more problems, so they get to do more expensive and profitable fixes. And some manufacturers (like Toyota) thrive off their reputation for reliability, knowing that if your car dies prematurely you'll probably buy from someone else next time.

But you know what I haven't found: I have yet to see anybody actually send their transmission fluid to a testing service to see what the condition of the fluid is. Most people seem to just marvel at how "dark" it is when they change it, which isn't a useful metric of fluid condition anymore. Any recommendation for service intervals is basically random guesswork, probably favoring earlier changes for piece of mind.

What's missing here is a definition of "lifetime." Claims that this means for the warranty period are absurd. The only thing I can conclude is that manufacturers believe that when the transmission fails it will be for some reason besides the fluid condition. Thus, the fluid will last for the lifetime of the transmission. Not forever, mind you. But still, we don't know how long they think a transmission should last. I'll point out here that the service manual for the RAV4 goes out to 120,000 miles (which is when spark plugs finally need to be replaced), implying that "lifetime" means at least that long. Otherwise they could claim "lifetime spark plugs."

When it comes to the Toyota hybrids -- I'm more inclined to believe their transmission lifetime claims. The eCVT is just so simple, and many of the things that fail on an automatic or pulley CVT just don't exist. And the main killer of transmission fluid is heat, made worse when you're doing things like towing. But most Toyota hybrids just aren't used for that (and if they are, the service schedule does say you should replace the fluid). The same goes for oil changes: a hybrid is easier on the gas engine for each mile driven. So I'll probably follow the recommended schedule, maybe changing the transmission fluid at 100k just because.

But my Subaru is another matter. Its chain-driven CVT is better than most, but I still want it to last. I have an ODB2 scanner, which has a metric for the transmission fluid life: at 60k miles it says I'm a whopping 2-3% through the fluid's lifetime (probably estimated from the temperature of the fluid over time, I'm guessing). That certainly can't be very accurate, though (2 million mile lifetime?). But who knows what the "right" interval really is. And here's another problem: even though the transmission holds 13 qt, a simple drain-and-fill will only replace about 1/4th of that. Some people do like 2-3 drains in succession to replace as much of the old fluid as possible (but still only get about half). So is there even a point, unless I spend several hundreds (and then what's the point, if maintenance is too expensive).

I'll probably do a drain and fill myself soon, maybe come spring. At $13-$17/qt it won't be cheap, but since I can't trust anybody in this, all I can do is be conservative and change it anyway.

Sorry, rant over.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
174 Posts
I don't know enough about Honda's CVT to hypothesize about longevity. The 2020 Accord offers a few options depending on trim, including a 10-speed traditional automatic, CVT, 6-Speed Manual, and E-CVT for the hybrid variants. In general, I like having options, so I am happy that Honda still offers a few to pick from.

@RAVDoug - So as someone that's pretty "passionate" about the Subaru brand, I'll say that I had an issue with my CVT in my 2011 Outback about 2 years ago, well outside of warranty, and I called corporate. They issued me a Good Will discount, and I didn't pay a cent for what was quoted around a $1900 repair which included the torque converter being replaced as well as a complete fluid change. I have also heard of Honda and other manufacturers also issuing Good Will discounts as well, so it seems like it's in their best interests. Subaru makes a big deal out of their stat that "98% of all Subarus are still on the road after 10 years" so when you point that out to the customer service rep they tend to agree. I agree with you that Toyota's eCVT has less wear and tear compared to the chain and pulley that Subaru uses, and the issue with the chain is that it relies on constant tension, and varying tension, to work. Once it fails, it grenades.

I also used an OBD tool called OBDLink in my Outback which I used to estimate the "CVT Fluid Deterioration Rate" - but this is absolutely an experimental value and based off of a lot of mathematics and variables (including max and minimum temperatures, duty cycles, total revolutions, etc) ... There are several instances on the Subaru Outback & Forester bulletin boards of people that have sent their CVTF to "Blackstone" for oil analysis. They'll do a bunch of tests on it compared to a "virgin" oil sample and tell you how it stacks up. One guy in San Francisco (very hilly area, lots of urban driving) had approximately a "21%" CVTF deterioration rate per his OBD tool and as such had it changed out around the 150k mark. Mine was somewhere in the 3-4% range after 85k, but it was changed out with the converter replacement.

You're right, a lot of the CVTF is confined to the valve body and the torque converter, so if you do a drain-and-fill, you won't get it all out. I've heard of people doing a CVTF drain and fill, driving for a few hundred miles to "mix" everything together, and then doing it again another 1 or 2 times. But, as you also pointed out, this is an expensive process as the fluids are sold in quarts and pricey. There are also multiple variants of CVTF that Subaru sells, and they are not interchangable ... I personally own the Factory Service Manual for my Outback and it is a complicated process in terms of filling it up. There are specific temperature ranges and you have to cycle through the gears in a certain way. All of the data is accessible easily via the Subaru Select Tool (SST) but I don't have that as it costs around $1000 just for the tool.

So, in that circumstance, I'd just "eat" the cost and bring it to the dealer, who quoted me around $350 for the CVTF change and that was back in 2017...

When I leased my new Forester I told myself I would have to be proactive and change it every 60k miles - this is also interestingly enough the OFFICIAL Subaru Canada maintenance interval. I reached out to Subaru Canada and they said this is due to their more extreme climate, especially winter temperatures. So, I figure at the least, the 60k interval is good enough for me.

But now that I'm on this whole Tesla kick I just look at that and figure I won't have to deal with that anymore. I'll have to deal with other things, of course. ;) In hindsight if I really wanted a hybrid or plug-in hybrid if the price is right, I would be pretty happy with the RAV4 since it's AWD or RAV4 Prime if the price is comparable. They should provide years if not decades of faithful service.

Simply put, if I was in the market for an AWD SUV or Crossover, I'm sure any RAV4 would be a great choice depending on your budget. But depending on the price of the RAV4 Prime, it might push people away towards BEV's (and that wouldn't be a bad thing, either...)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
456 Posts
Just about everybody is claiming "lifetime fluids" for transmissions, including Toyota.

Sorry, rant incoming.

This is a seriously frustrating thing in the industry right now. On the one hand you have traditionalists who insist on sticking with the service intervals manufacturers suggested over 20 years ago. They do oil changes every 3k miles (sometimes more often), even with synthetic fluids. Some insist on doing transmission fluid every 10k or 15k. After all, replacing them too often doesn't hurt anything, right? It's cheap insurance!

Then you get news reports about untrustworthy mechanics and dealerships, who scam their customers into getting services they simply don't need. You want to trust your mechanic, but they have a profit motive in getting you to "over service" your vehicle (making money from the service itself, and from any follow-on repairs that they can catch). Instead, they tell you to look at your owner's manual: the manufacturer will tell you exactly how often to change that oil and what services may or may not be needed regularly.

So then you go to the manual and see that the manufacturer recommends 10k intervals for the oil and lifetime for the transmission, differentials, etc. Some things are only every 100k, like spark plugs. And so you think that wow, you don't really have to do much preventative maintenance at all with cars anymore.

But then people start pointing out that dealerships have the opposite profit motive: if the car breaks down you have to buy another one to replace it. They just want to claim long service intervals so you think the car is easier to maintain, but it's not. The standard line is that "lifetime" really means "for the warranty period" since after that the manufacturer is off the hook.

And so we're left in a stupid situation, where nobody can agree on what the right service intervals are. Who can you trust, here? I don't want to do any more maintenance than I need to: it's a waste of time, money, effort, and resources. But I also want to drive my car for 200k or more, if possible. And despite what others might claim about nefarious motives, there's also reasons in the other direction: some mechanics might want your car to have more problems, so they get to do more expensive and profitable fixes. And some manufacturers (like Toyota) thrive off their reputation for reliability, knowing that if your car dies prematurely you'll probably buy from someone else next time.

But you know what I haven't found: I have yet to see anybody actually send their transmission fluid to a testing service to see what the condition of the fluid is. Most people seem to just marvel at how "dark" it is when they change it, which isn't a useful metric of fluid condition anymore. Any recommendation for service intervals is basically random guesswork, probably favoring earlier changes for piece of mind.

What's missing here is a definition of "lifetime." Claims that this means for the warranty period are absurd. The only thing I can conclude is that manufacturers believe that when the transmission fails it will be for some reason besides the fluid condition. Thus, the fluid will last for the lifetime of the transmission. Not forever, mind you. But still, we don't know how long they think a transmission should last. I'll point out here that the service manual for the RAV4 goes out to 120,000 miles (which is when spark plugs finally need to be replaced), implying that "lifetime" means at least that long. Otherwise they could claim "lifetime spark plugs."

When it comes to the Toyota hybrids -- I'm more inclined to believe their transmission lifetime claims. The eCVT is just so simple, and many of the things that fail on an automatic or pulley CVT just don't exist. And the main killer of transmission fluid is heat, made worse when you're doing things like towing. But most Toyota hybrids just aren't used for that (and if they are, the service schedule does say you should replace the fluid). The same goes for oil changes: a hybrid is easier on the gas engine for each mile driven. So I'll probably follow the recommended schedule, maybe changing the transmission fluid at 100k just because.

But my Subaru is another matter. Its chain-driven CVT is better than most, but I still want it to last. I have an ODB2 scanner, which has a metric for the transmission fluid life: at 60k miles it says I'm a whopping 2-3% through the fluid's lifetime (probably estimated from the temperature of the fluid over time, I'm guessing). That certainly can't be very accurate, though (2 million mile lifetime?). But who knows what the "right" interval really is. And here's another problem: even though the transmission holds 13 qt, a simple drain-and-fill will only replace about 1/4th of that. Some people do like 2-3 drains in succession to replace as much of the old fluid as possible (but still only get about half). So is there even a point, unless I spend several hundreds (and then what's the point, if maintenance is too expensive).

I'll probably do a drain and fill myself soon, maybe come spring. At $13-$17/qt it won't be cheap, but since I can't trust anybody in this, all I can do is be conservative and change it anyway.

Sorry, rant over.
I sort of agree with you to a degree, but you need to put some common sense in it. Fluids degrade sitting in the bottle. Mobile synthetic ATF published a shelf life of 5 years if properly sealed. Lifetime is the life the OEM wants it to last, not the 300K+ miles I want it to last. If you are worried about cost, learn to DIY. Fluids cost almost nothing, and aren't that hard to change.

Honestly the proper way to do it would be run time hours - which could easily be accomplished on today's vehicles with a simple app.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
811 Posts
I don't know enough about Honda's CVT to hypothesize about longevity.
I know enough that when my Honda transmission (non-CVT) blew at 72k miles for the exact reason it was recalled and it was towed to the dealer who did the recall inspection and who said in writing it didn't need the recall fix, I got nothing from the dealer or corporate.

I'd also suggest you look at the https://www.crvownersclub.com/forums/#honda-cr-v.6 forum and see the number of complaints. Particularly the thread about the 1.5T engine and gas in the water that rivals out fill-up thread. It just seems to me there are lots more complaints than I see here.

My service experience and that thread redirected me away from the Honda brand though I liked the CRV I drove. I'd wait and see the owner's experiences for a while before I bought a Honda hybrid.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
484 Posts
I sort of agree with you to a degree, but you need to put some common sense in it. Fluids degrade sitting in the bottle. Mobile synthetic ATF published a shelf life of 5 years if properly sealed. Lifetime is the life the OEM wants it to last, not the 300K+ miles I want it to last. If you are worried about cost, learn to DIY. Fluids cost almost nothing, and aren't that hard to change.

Honestly the proper way to do it would be run time hours - which could easily be accomplished on today's vehicles with a simple app.
Some counter points, just to keep this debate going a bit.

Shelf life and service life aren't the same thing, and the fluid is still good to install and use near the end of the shelf life. (i.e. a fluid that sat on the shelf for 4.5 years had better give more than 6 months of service life.) What we don't know is what the service life of a fluid is. Mobile 1 says to ask the manufacturer ... and now we're at square 1.

And of course fluids degrade. Nobody's arguing against that. What manufacturers are effectively saying is that the fluid itself is no longer the limiting factor in transmission life. That it performs its job adequately in spite of degradation over time and use. Whether you believe them is another matter entirely. We don't know what lifetime they have in mind, they won't tell us. Even though I guarantee every major part in a car has an estimated life that they design towards, that's not going to be released to the public.

I'm going to disagree about the cost and ease of changing the fluid. At least for my Subaru. When I do this (and I probably will soon), it's going to cost somewhere around $125 just for the fluid, and even then I'm only going to be replacing a bit over half of it. And it's not an easy process, not compared to an oil change. There's a very specific process involved to get the proper fluid level: shifting through gears, holding the transmission at a specific temperature, etc. Get it wrong and you're going to do far more damage to the transmission than leaving the old fluid in there would ever do. And since you only change out like 1/4th of the fluid each time, you have to do it 2 or 3 times in a row. This just isn't something most home mechanics will want to deal with. A professional mechanic will charge 2-3 times that, though, and you start to wonder if you'll extend the life of the transmission enough that it's even worthwhile (especially if you follow some recommendations to change the fluid every 30k or even 15k).

But ... I'll probably do it soon anyway. It'll be a pain, but whatever. This is all guesswork at this point, so I'll make my own guess and do it soon. And then I'll tackle the fuel filter (inside the tank ... that'll be fun ...).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
463 Posts
I'm going to disagree about the cost and ease of changing the fluid. At least for my Subaru. When I do this (and I probably will soon), it's going to cost somewhere around $125 just for the fluid, and even then I'm only going to be replacing a bit over half of it. And it's not an easy process, not compared to an oil change.
Got it that the Subaru is difficult but the Toyota eCVT is much less complicated. Of course, "easy" is a relative term. The hardest part is getting the vehicle up on stands (so the vehicle is level) and then removing the plastic aerodynamic sheeting (so the eCVT is accessible) . Cost of fluid is less than $50. Here is the procedure, as it was done on a Prius by a PriusChat member, should be similar on a Rav4 hybrid:

1. Raise the car and get it roughly level. (I raise the front, set it on jackstands, repeat for the back.)
2. Remove the engine underpanel completely.
3. Have a catch pan of some sort ready, remove the fill bolt, then the drain bolt.
4. Reinstall drain bolt with new washer, torque to 29 ft/lb.
5. Run a clear plastic tube down from top of engine bay, into the fill hole (about 3' should do, max OD about 5/8", to fit in fill hole.) Push a funnel into the tube.
6. Pour quarts (or liters) of Toyota ATF WS in. You can pour 3 in without worry, then with the 4th go slow. Best to have an assistant pour in maybe 100 cc at a time, then wait while it flows down. Somewhere around 3.5~4.0 quarts it should start to flow back out, which is the correct level (as long as the car is level). Even if you manage to squeeze all 4 in you should be good. Just feel with your pinkie, the level should be just below the fill hole lip by then.
7. Reinstall fill bolt with new washer, torque to 29 ft/lb.
8. Reinstall engine underpanel.
9. Lower the car. Toyota recommends to test drive and then recheck level. I actually did that the first time: waste of time. Just work carefully.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
484 Posts
Got it that the Subaru is difficult but the Toyota eCVT is much less complicated. Of course, "easy" is a relative term. The hardest part is getting the vehicle up on stands (so the vehicle is level) and then removing the plastic aerodynamic sheeting (so the eCVT is accessible) . Cost of fluid is less than $50. Here is the procedure, as it was done on a Prius by a PriusChat member, should be similar on a Rav4 hybrid:

1. Raise the car and get it roughly level. (I raise the front, set it on jackstands, repeat for the back.)
2. Remove the engine underpanel completely.
3. Have a catch pan of some sort ready, remove the fill bolt, then the drain bolt.
4. Reinstall drain bolt with new washer, torque to 29 ft/lb.
5. Run a clear plastic tube down from top of engine bay, into the fill hole (about 3' should do, max OD about 5/8", to fit in fill hole.) Push a funnel into the tube.
6. Pour quarts (or liters) of Toyota ATF WS in. You can pour 3 in without worry, then with the 4th go slow. Best to have an assistant pour in maybe 100 cc at a time, then wait while it flows down. Somewhere around 3.5~4.0 quarts it should start to flow back out, which is the correct level (as long as the car is level). Even if you manage to squeeze all 4 in you should be good. Just feel with your pinkie, the level should be just below the fill hole lip by then.
7. Reinstall fill bolt with new washer, torque to 29 ft/lb.
8. Reinstall engine underpanel.
9. Lower the car. Toyota recommends to test drive and then recheck level. I actually did that the first time: waste of time. Just work carefully.
Do you happen to know if the rear electric motor has any fluids in it? I haven't looked back there yet, but I imagine there should be something. The front electric motors are basically just part of the transmission.
 
661 - 680 of 1729 Posts
Top