Rav4 2.0 Litre Or 2.2 Litre Diesel

[bitwood]

Hi all, would welcome your thoughts and experience on the following please. I have my eye on a new RAV4 but somewhat confused re which engine to get, the 2.0 litre or 2.2.

The car will do average mileage, be family transport and not be used off road. I am tempted by the 2.2 as I am struggling to see the 2.0 litre as being powerful enough. That said I am somewhat reluctant to buy a 2.2 as previous experience of an Avensis (2008 150 BHP) was of poor mpg. It was so bad I sold it on quite quickly I have read the 2.2 topic with interest but am unsure whether folks are still having issues or whether the engine is now fixed.

In a nutshell, is the 2.0 litre up to the job for day to day family style motoring and is the 2.2 now a better option than previously.

Thanks for your time..

[Velocette]

I have a 2.2 D with the auto box. As mentioned in a previous thread I get around 38-39 mpg in mixed town and fast road driving. I am not a flat to the floor style driver. Worst I have had is 36 but rarely top the 40 mpg mark, with 22k on the clock now. Thanks to foot injury I need an auto but having said that the 150 bhp of the 2.2 seems pretty modest and I would prefer this to the 2.0. Engine fallibility issues were resolved a while back and I would be surprised to see any recurrence. Pundits say the Mazda CX-5 is the best of its type, but then again they don't have to buy, run and maintain them. Owner feedback as recorded on various forums concerning reliability and quality of dealers was enough to put me off and decide me to buy Toyota again. Frankly, you might do better but then again you won't go wrong either the 2.0 or 2.2 in my view.

[petershaw7]

I had same dilemma back in November. I went for a 2005 xt5 . Lucky to find a low mileage 55,000 one .on a 300 mile journey about 40+ and a little less on local driving. Plenty of power for most situation . But I think the look is so much nicer

Sent from my iPhone using Toyota OC

[philip42h]

I echo what Velocette has already said - in my case now 23,000 miles and 38.8mpg average. If you want a 4wd auto, the 2.2 is the better (and possibly only) bet. If you are happy with a 2wd manual I'm sure that the 2.0 is more than adequate and will return better economy. You need to decide what your priorities are and then test drive the car that best matches them.

[bitwood]

Thanks for your replies and thoughts. I guess test drive both 2.0 and 2.2 and take it from there. I looked at the CX 5 and it seems to hit the economy and performance button, but I felt it was so drab and dated inside so I ruled it out. No long warranty either !

Thinking back to the Avensis I owned, it returned about 40-42 on a run which is not far off what you are getting from your auto 2.2s. The Avensis was manual, pulled like a train when the revs were up but sixth was almost useless unless cruising at about 80 ! I guess it is this bit that really worries me. In this day and age we should be getting better from a 2.2 diesel or is it me !

Thanks again....

[justdriftinby]

Hi - heres my 2 penneth - i have 2013 2.2icon D-4D 6 speed manual....I used to have 2.0 litre petrol 5 speed 2006 xt3 manual.. both different cars in my experience ; the older one super smooth petrol ; give or take 40 mph locally or on a run...smaller , slightly higher , squatter car and more stylish in my opinion....but slightly underpowered on hills or towing......Newer car very roomy longer and much more powerful than t'other with cruise control and a few more goodies. again around 40 mpg.. I feel it has lost the looks and my preferred style of the older models ... but it is much more refined alround and like most other cars of its ilk.....If I could I would have one of the 3 door they used to produce brought up to date - i would think they'd sell in their droves!!!!!

I have no experience of these in auto but manually as a near new car goes I am very happy........Regards fromPaul..

[grasshopper]

2006 Rav4 xt3 2.0 petrol - averaging 32mpg, tank range about 350miles. Performance is average but it's not about speed in one of these really is it. I think reading about the diesels mpg and what they cost there's probably not a lot in it. Petrol is most probably more reliable with no egr, dpf etc. But...wish they did a 6 speed manual petrol as engine can be a bit noisy over 70mph. Old tech engine however, bullet proof otherwise!