because it still takes up a lot of space and adds a lot of weight. and of course there's cost...

the sorrento for example allows you to have the 3rd row or not (and save $1200).

 

That is what was told to me when I voiced the same wish: Toyota has a progression of crossovers, from small to large. The RAV4 is the small one, available only with 2 rows of seats and only a 4-cylinder engine. The Highlander is the large one, available only with 3 rows of seats and only a 6-cylinder engine. The Venza is the middle one, available only with 2 rows of seats, and either a 4-cylinder or 6-cylinder engines.

But I wish the Venza was a bit closer to the RAV4 in size. It is almost the size of the Highlander, which I find too big -- too wide and too heavy. The RAV4's rear seat is too small for my use; the Venza is too big and heavy.

 

the venza, while a decent looking vehicle, is basically a heavy station wagon. it's not tall enough to be considered a cuv/suv, and so vertical cargo room is extremely cramped. it's almost like an avalon wagon.

 

Yeah and the Venza is deceptively large, but not in a useful way. I've driven several of them, completely unappealing vehicle IMHO.

I don't know that Toyota needs another vehicle though to fill a niche between the RAV4 and the Highlander. They do have the 4Runner.

 

More like they force you to pay 1200 for third row. 3rd row in Highlander comes standard.

 

Rav4, Venza, Highlander, 4Runner, Sequoia, Land Cruiser (FJ still in production?). I really don't see them slotting another SUV in the lineup to fill a mini-niche.

 

If you need a third row.
I wouldn't.

 

But theres the question, would you really be in the market for a Highlander?

For me where I am, I'd be hard pressed to buy another vehicle without a third row because when we have a kid we're going to want 3 rows. Thats just the target Toyota is going after, families...so in their rationale it would be like offering the Sienna minivan with an optional third row instead of a standard third row...why would they do that? If you didn't need a third row I'm not sure why one would purchase a Highlander, you could get something shorter and more nimble...thats why Hyundai has a two vehicle solution in the Santa Fe. Nissan has a standard third row in the Pathfinder, Ford has a standard third row in the Explorer in all but the base fleet car. So, its actually atypical for the third row to be an option, not atypical for it to be standard in this class.

 

Toyota, with the Venza, could have had a good competitor to the top-selling Subaru Outback if they had not insisted on those huge 19/20" wheels and rubber-band tires. When people test-drove Venzas on bumpy roads (and considered the potential cost of replacing those tires when they wore out), more often than not, they ended up at the Subie shop.

 

I'm just stating that I don't need a third row.If given the choice as an option,I'd pass.Nice to have the choice,though.As far as the size,some people want a bigger SUV.
I also can understand why Toyota just has a third row and that's it.
However,knocking a manufacturer for giving you a choice doesn't make sense to me.

 

This is why I think the current Grand Cherokee is such a hit. Great size for a 2 row with luxury features available, etc. The new Cherokee is also quite substantial and will do well.

 

Looks much better. i like the aggressive tundra like front. side is bit generic, but practically every damn SUVs out their have generic side profiles. i would have to go for a ride. i'm looking to get an suv with 3rd row for my wife sometime this year. this could be a strong candidate.

 

I would never knock a manufacturer for giving the choice, I can just understand why it would just be standard in this type of car.

 

NOT having a 3rd row puts a car in this class behind. I previously had an '04 Pilot; when shopping for that car, there weren't quite as many 3 row choices, and the Highlander 3rd row was a joke of a retrofit for '04. I liked the Nissan Pathfinder, but honestly didn't even seriously consider it. Because for equal dollars, while I may not be "needing" a 3rd row with a one year old, if my parents were in town visiting, or we had someone else with us, I didn't want to be forced to start bring 2 cars wherever we were going. Plus, I knew I'd have the car a few years, once we started getting into the car pool stage.

So for 4-5 years, I rarely used the 3rd row. Then for 3 years, we used it a lot. If I had bought the Pathfinder, I'd have been in a bit of a bind.

And, in the current market, there's just too many good choices out there the have a 3rd row. I understand the better cargo capacity, less weight and cost arguments. But frankly, I think that if you are analyzing the facts that closely, you probably already figured out that a minivan is just a better all around choice anyway...

 

This is really where I'm at, even without a kid yet. I always find myself with the odd "one more person" to carry when we travel and get out and about while we're away. Me, my wife, and two couples...we need two cars with only one row. I've at times had someone in the cargo area for short trips, but we're all getting too old for that.