mmarshall

Agreed on the cheap interior and exterior trim, but it 's hard to beat the reliability of Toyota drivetrains.

Toys4RJill

It's does not have a cheap interior, it has a competitive interior. All of the competitors are roughly the same.

spwolf

Toyota has Lexus for more... you cant expect Toyota to have Lexus quality interiors. Well you can, it is just not realistic.

I have sat in brand new 2016/2017 Tiguan, in 2016 Hyundai Tucson and 2017 Kia Sportage. All had a lot plastics that were questionable - actually I was quite disappointed by all of them since they were brand new models.

Best for me was 2017 Seat Aztec which is Tiguan's brother but it isnt missing anything when it comes to interior quality compared to Tiguan, while having a lot smaller price.

SW17LS

I don't expect Toyota to have a Lexus quality interior, I would like to see Toyota have an interior that isn't the cheapest feeling interior in its class, which IMHO right now they do not have one model that doesn't have the cheapest feeling interior in its class.

I'd like Toyota to have a Hyundai or Kia quality interior. Not too much to ask IMHO. Hell, my Kia Sedona has significantly better leather quality than my $80,000 LS460. That's just wrong.

mmarshall

While I respect your opinion, I do not agree. The designers of the last two generations of the RAV4 simply did not spend much on that vehicle's interior. In fact, IMO, they did a better job on your Corolla sedan.

However, it is also true that, as you note, none of the interiors in this mainstream-CUV class can really be considered luxury-class. IMO, the Buick Encore's, overall, is the best, but an argument can be made that the RAV-4 competes more directly with the cheaper, much less plush Chevrolet Trax, which is done on the same Chevy-Sonic and Opel-based platform as the Encore.

SW17LS

I drove everything in this class a month ago. The CX-5 has a very good quality interior that doesn't feel cheap. The Tuscon is not as nice as it, but it also feels upscale with good materials. The CR-V is very utilitarian and bland, but also feels high quality. The Rav-4 feels cheap. I didn't even drive it, would never consider buying one with so many other more compelling entries.

Yes everything has low quality plastics around in this segment, but you can design an interior in such a way that it plays to its strengths. Colors, trims, contrasts. Toyota doesn't even really try IMHO. Better than they were say 5 years ago, but a long way left to go.

mmarshall

Yeah....my brother spent only 25K on a new Kia Sportage last year, and just loves it. The interior may not LOOK plush, but it, along with the exterior and trim, uses good materials underneath.

SW17LS

Upper trim Kias look plush too. Looks good, feels good. Even the harder plastics have a higher quality feel in them, you don't see mold lines and stuff like you do from Toyota.

The leather REALLY pisses me off.

mmarshall

One thing in the RAV-4's favor, though, that will offset some of the interior cheapness (and, yes, I forgot to mention it in the review, even though I had tried out the feature myself) is a standard 60/40 rear cloth seat with armrest and built-in reclining. It is unusual for a vehicle in this class to provide reclining rear seats for passenger comfort...and it is standard even in the base LE model.

So, given that fact, I'll (slightly) modify some of my earlier comments on the material-cheapness inside.

ST430

Although I am somewhat bias, I do not feel the RAV4 interior is "cheap" as compared to the CRV. IMHO they have better materials (plastics and non-fuzzy cloth), but the design is much more old-fashion and conservative. Now if you compare it to say the CX5, I can understand it is definitely not as modernized and is seemingly more cheap. This is coming from a 09' and '14 RAV4 owner that is looking to get into a new SUV as well.

mmarshall

I understand your position, and respect it. But, as I see it, materials are materials, no matter how you shape or style them. I am not the type of person who is wooed by looks, fashion, or style....never have been.


Mazda blew one (IMO) important thing, though, in the CX-5's interior....they used a cheap set of blue/red idiot-lights for engine temperature instead of a proper gauge. It is sometimes very important that you be able to notice an upward or downward trend in temperature (say, from a slowly leaking or defective thermostat) before it gets hot or cold enough for the lights to come on. Engines with aluminum blocks can also be damaged from a lot of heat. A lack of a gauge is a serious issue with me, and, in some cases, could be a deal-breaker.

SW17LS

I agree with Mike, materials are materials

Sulu

Mike, please elaborate. What do you mean by "materials are materials"?

SW17LS

He means that the quality of materials don't have anything to do with how they're styled.

mmarshall

IMO, and in the sense that I'm using the term, cheap, unimpressive materials make no difference to me whether they are used in an interior that not only looks cheap, but also in an interior that doesn't necessarily look cheap on the surface, but IS cheap and flimsy underneath. The 2014+ Toyota Avalon, IMO, is a classic example of the latter.......nice-lookng chrome/brushed-metal/wood-tone trim which is nothing but thin flimsy plastic and/or loosely-attached parts underneath. So, to a somewhat lesser extent, is the interior of the big Buick Enclave....a lot of glittery flash on the surface, but nothing but traditional GM-grade plastic underneath.....only that plastic isn't quite as thin as what is on the Avalon's interior.

So, my basic point is that it doesn't matter what kind of actual styling is done with materials, what color they are, or how much glitter is painted or plated on top of them, or how expensive or cheap the interior simply LOOKS. IMO what matters is what those materials inside are actually made of. So, it may not LOOK like a duck, but if it feels like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck......well, I think you get the picture.

BTW.....if you didn't notice earlier, when I first wrote up the review, I had forgotten to mention one important thing inside...the standard manually-reclining mechanisms the 60/40 rear seats, even on the base LE version (I tried them out myself, of course). Rear seat-recliners are something not often seen in this class of SUVs/CUVs, and contributes significantly to rear-seat comfort. That is something that, IMO, Toyota should be given credit for, even with all of the questionable or otherwise cheap materials inside. (I went back and added those comments)