Jump to content

2019 TOYOTA RAV4 FIRST LOOK


silvrsvt

Recommended Posts

IMO, Toyota has addressed some of the biggest complaints they get: styling.

 

They used to be very bland. So they spiced it up. Oops. Too much. Dial it back. Oh, and your SUV designs are a little feminine. Ok, here's a Tacoma grill on the little grocery getter. Happy now consumer?

 

 

And they're gonna sell a ton of them.

Edited by J-150
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, Toyota has addressed some of the biggest complaints they get: styling.

 

They used to be very bland. So they spiced it up. Oops. Too much. Dial it back. Oh, and your SUV designs are a little feminine. Ok, here's a Tacoma grill on the little grocery getter. Happy now consumer?

 

 

And they're gonna sell a ton of them.

 

They'll sell a bazillion of them no matter what they look like. Toyota buyers buy for the badge, not looks.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

They'll sell a bazillion of them no matter what they look like. Toyota buyers buy for the badge, not looks.

 

Yes sir. Specifically, Toyota cars and trucks provide long term reliability and durability unmatched by other carmakers. If they keep that tradition strong, styling won't matter much.

 

RAV4 is one of the top five car and truck models that owners are most likely to keep owning and operating for 15 years or more. The other four are also Toyotas: Highlander, Sienna, Tundra, and Prius. https://blog.iseecars.com/the-15-cars-owners-keep-for-15-years-or-more/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is NOT ugly by any stretch. As overwrought as it is, it's still very thoughtfully and cleverly executed and it's certainly innovative for a segment which is all looking the same.

 

Would I want Ford to do something like this...nope! I would rather have a CRV.

 

1386x780_06.jpg

Edited by Assimilator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is NOT ugly by any stretch. As overwrought as it is, it's still very thoughtfully and cleverly executed and it's certainly innovative for a segment which is all looking the same.

 

Would I want Ford to do something like this...nope! I would rather have a CRV.

 

1386x780_06.jpg

 

It's not Aztec bad, but it's not pretty. (I do think Toyota could produce the Aztec and it'd still sell)

 

I don't think the CRV is very attractive either though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

They'll sell a bazillion of them no matter what they look like. Toyota buyers buy for the badge, not looks.

 

No, Toyota owners actually think their stuff looks good - go figure! There are many very odd things that cannot be rationally explained.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Why? Because you said?

 

The reasons sir are because crossover vehicles are not rational by design and because consumers are often not rational in the products they decide to buy. For these reasons, 2019 RAV4 and other new crossover vehicles from other brands will find lots of willing buyers. Real SUVs, wagons, and hatchbacks won't be anywhere near as popular as the crossovers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The reasons sir are because crossover vehicles are not rational by design and because consumers are often not rational in the products they decide to buy. For these reasons, 2019 RAV4 and other new crossover vehicles from other brands will find lots of willing buyers. Real SUVs, wagons, and hatchbacks won't be anywhere near as popular as the crossovers.

 

I'm asking why it's not "rational by design"? What's not rational about it? You haven't answered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reasons sir are because crossover vehicles are not rational by design and because consumers are often not rational in the products they decide to buy. For these reasons, 2019 RAV4 and other new crossover vehicles from other brands will find lots of willing buyers. Real SUVs, wagons, and hatchbacks won't be anywhere near as popular as the crossovers.

Horse hockey. There is nothing irrational about crossovers. They’re just car based wagons with higher seating positions. The only real compromise is COG but that’s not an issue for 99.9999% of drivers.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm asking why it's not "rational by design"? What's not rational about it? You haven't answered.

 

Sorry about that sir. Crossovers are not rational because they compromise the driving dynamics, fuel efficiency, and style of cars. At the same time, most crossovers lack the towing, off road, and heavy duty capabilities of real SUVs.

 

If someone wants cargo and passenger hauling versatility with car-like driving characteristics, fuel economy, and style, the rational choices are conventional wagons and hatchbacks.

If someone wants similar utility but with off road and towing capabilities, the rational choices are real SUVs.

 

But clearly people are inclined to buy crossovers like RAV4. Otherwise their sales volumes wouldn't have grown so much in the past 5 years. The reasons for that growth aren't based on rational thinking though. I think the marketing techniques used by automakers are effective in getting people think emotionally. Not rationally. For example, last year Toyota introduced a new trim level for RAV4 called Adventure. It is no more capable off road than other RAV4 models. But Toyota's press introduction and advertising for that vehicle got people to associate RAV4 with outdoors, wilderness, and that kind of stuff.

 

2018-toyota-rav4_100591719_h.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your choice of a Jag XF is just as irrational as any crossover purchase. You could have gotten by with a Fusion or a Camry for a lot less money.

 

There is no mileage penalty to speak of. A 2.0 Edge gets 24 mpg combined and 21 city while a 2.0 Fusion gets 25 mpg and 21 city.

 

For 99.99999% of drivers there is no discernible difference in performance or handling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Sorry about that sir. Crossovers are not rational because they compromise the driving dynamics, fuel efficiency, and style of cars. At the same time, most crossovers lack the towing, off road, and heavy duty capabilities of real SUVs.

 

If someone wants cargo and passenger hauling versatility with car-like driving characteristics, fuel economy, and style, the rational choices are conventional wagons and hatchbacks.

If someone wants similar utility but with off road and towing capabilities, the rational choices are real SUVs.

 

But clearly people are inclined to buy crossovers like RAV4. Otherwise their sales volumes wouldn't have grown so much in the past 5 years. The reasons for that growth aren't based on rational thinking though. I think the marketing techniques used by automakers are effective in getting people think emotionally. Not rationally. For example, last year Toyota introduced a new trim level for RAV4 called Adventure. It is no more capable off road than other RAV4 models. But Toyota's press introduction and advertising for that vehicle got people to associate RAV4 with outdoors, wilderness, and that kind of stuff.

 

Everything you said there is opinion.

 

So wanting a car like ride and higher seating position is irrational then?

 

Just because you view it as "irrational" doesn't mean it is. And clearly the market increasingly sees it as rational.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...