RAV4 PHEV

[GBgraham]

Hi guys

I am looking forward to following this forum as I am just about to take the leap to a RAV4 PHEV from my C-HR which I sold yesterday.

On Wednesday I go to test drive and then lay the deposit on a Style Plus so  you will no doubt be getting some questions in the near future.

Cheers

[ColinB]

Hi, I'm another one who made the change from a C-HR to a RAV4, albeit "just" an HEV. They both have their strengths and weaknesses, the RAV4 is much roomier and can comfortably fit 4 - at 6'1" (but shrinking) there was virtually no legroom behind me. The C-HR was quieter, more economical and fun to drive (although the RAV4 can pick up its skirts and run). I don't regret the change, but still occasionally look at C-HRs and would consider one of the new one when it's time to change.

Colin

[ernieb]

The RAV4 PHEV is pretty good when you floor the go pedal. I’ve had the car over two years and still puts a smile on my face.

[Mike2222]

23 hours ago, GBgraham said:

lay the deposit on a Style Plus

A quick Google search suggests you would be based in Spain? Looks like you get the 360 camera, which is nice. Wasn't an option here on the phev until quite recently, annoyingly (tho tbh this is a minor gripe, and I second @ernieb in that the enjoyment of the car doesn't seem to be waning with time).

 

More interestingly, however, the Spanish Toyota website seems to be implying that your version of the 'Toyota Relax' warranty system is a whopping 15 (!😳!) years??? Is that right? 

[GBgraham]

It's all a case of ticking boxes for me. I do like bigger a vehicles with my last two being an X3 and a Sportage.

I thought I could have coped with the C-HR but for me I found a little uncomfortable on longer trips and tight on load space but other than that quite an enjoyable car to drive and never faulted on anything and especially when I got 200€ more than I paid for it 2 1/2 years later.

#Mike2222 

I'm in Greece and I do get the 360 camera, I'm not sure on the warranty until Wednesday but I am expecting the same as the C-HR, 6 years with 11 years on the Battery.

I am always pleased to read positive and even negative comments

 

 

[Mike2222]

4 hours ago, GBgraham said:

I'm in Greece and I do get the 360 camera, I'm not sure on the warranty until Wednesday but I am expecting the same as the C-HR, 6 years with 11 years on the battery.

Looks like your right (from Greek Toyota site). I realise each country-specific branch of Toyota chooses these details, but you wonder why certain decisions are made. When I was buying here in UK, top spec was called "dynamic premium" and headline features are electric front (heated & ventilated, with memory on driver) seats, sun(/"moon"?) roof, and heads up display. Looks like you'd have to stump up another few grand to get electric seats (not sure if memory) and a hefty €3400 to get a HUD. 

 

Up until last ~2yrs here in UK warranty was 5yrs, but seems Toyota only ever gave a 3yr warranty from factory, and the cost of the extra 2yrs was actually a 'policy'/cover from Toyota UK. Now they've changed to from years 4 to 10 (or up to 100k miles), as long as your annual service is with Toyota dealership, you'll get a rolling extra year of warranty cover, however it is not quite a comprehensive as the original manufacturer warranty. And the hydrid Battery is up to 15yrs if you get an annual Toyota hybrid healthcheck (automatically included in service, but you theoretically could have is seperately/as a standalone maintenance).

 

Assuming not a declining cover over time, I'd personally prefer your 6yrs from purchase, however the Relax warranty is certainly better than nothing. 

Edited September 25, 2023 by Mike2222
Unexplained caps lock

[HSDish]

On 9/24/2023 at 11:02 AM, ernieb said:

The RAV4 PHEV is pretty good when you floor the go pedal. I’ve had the car over two years and still puts a smile on my face.

We have had Toyota Auris 1.8TS Hsd 2014, Auris 1.8 hatch 2015, Prius + 1.8 2017, Prius 1.8 PEV 2016 and Prius 1.8 PEV 2018 and theres a BIG differens in acceleration with our curent Rav 4 phev 2020 🙂

[NASY]

40 minutes ago, HSDish said:

We have had Toyota Auris 1.8TS Hsd 2014, Auris 1.8 hatch 2015, Prius + 1.8 2017, Prius 1.8 PEV 2016 and Prius 1.8 PEV 2018 and theres a BIG differens in acceleration with our curent Rav 4 phev 2020 🙂

You could own most any regular cars out there and there will be a big difference between them and a RAV PHEV because it is damned quick. The fact that the performance comes at no cost in economy really knocks some pretty expensive competition into a cocked hat. Only thing is you get to look at the centre of the steering wheel crying out reliability rather than image - or is that an image already?

[Mike2222]

Although I have no intention of changing cars anytime soon, my Google algorithms continue to suggest articles about new cars, specifically PHEVs (and BEVs), and I am increasingly convinced that no other manufacturer (lexus don't count) has cottoned on to (or more likely is deciding not to engage with) the benefits of structuring a PHEV along the lines of Toyota and specifically the Rav, ie essentially BEV propulsion, with a ICE generator (albeit a fairly massive one) / backup propulsion. 

 

I have yet to read about an alternative design in a modern day on sale car (ie not including things like the Vauxhaul/Opel Ampera or Chevy Bolt from 10-15yrs ago), other than perhaps the Polestar One (which is both stonkingly expensive and no longer in production), where they haven't just constructed a drivetrain of essentially a normal ICE yet stuck a medium/weak electric motor on the driveshaft/gearbox, meaning that under any moderate or heavy acceleration, it will need the ice to kick in. Even the ones with hefty Battery sizes (and thus headline grabbing ev range figures) like the bmw x5 45e (~50+ miles ev range) or merc gle (can't remember the exact designation, but is a diesel with something like 60miles or claimed ev range) have a relatively disappointing ev motor strength, relative to the size of the 2.5-3tonne vehicle. 

 

Additionally, for me one of the joys of the Rav is the instant torque(/go-kart effect), which only comes from having beefy electric motors driving the axle(s) directly. Taking the BMW as a comparison, headline figures of 394hp & 450Nm, however only 112hp & 265Nm is coming from the ev motor with a kerb weight of 2510kg. The Rav pumps out 182hp fron the front axle & 54hp from rear, with 270Nm from both, and a kerb weight of 1910kg. I can t say I have test driven the beemer, but I would guess the ev experience is probably underwhelming compared to the Rav, although by contrast I would think it's probably more enjoyable experience once the 3.0L straight six joins the party! As much as I love the engineering of the HSD, the aural quality is something you 'get used to' rather than enjoy 😂! 

[Mike2222]

27 minutes ago, Mike2222 said:

I have yet to read about an alternative design in a modern day on sale car 

On reflection, I think the ford kuga isnt a bad design, in this regard, from memory. 

 

(and obviously suzuki across doesn't count either!) 

[Roger_N]

Mike

Have at look at this new Honda.

https://www.honda.co.uk/cars/new/zr-v-hybrid-suv/overview.html

[Mike2222]

16 minutes ago, Roger_N said:

Mike

Have at look at this new Honda.

https://www.honda.co.uk/cars/new/zr-v-hybrid-suv/overview.html

Looks like a good HEV design, tho I don't think they're planning a PHEV, which is what I was getting at.

 

I haven't read into the actual engine/driveshaft/gearbox layout etc, but it looks like this is a range extender EV type design, but due to the tiny Battery (1.05kwh), the engine is essentially running most of the time. Whatcar says they got 45.2mpg on a "real world" test run, which is certainly respectable on petrol, but the Rav HEV seems to get better than that (according to my learned forum HEV colleagues?) in the real world and is bigger/roomier etc. 

[GBgraham]

Well my day has been spoilt as there has been a ***** up with delivery from Toyota to the dealer so now it has been moved to next week, although I have now paid a deposit on the RAV4 PHEV.

#Mike2222 I think Toyota have hit the nail on the head with the RAV4 PHEV with power to weight ratio by out classing other manufactures and the few you mentioned do not come into the same band of reliability, BMW being one. But I totally believe that PHEV is the way to go as I would not buy an EV at all.

#Roger_N

I can't answer for #Mike2222 but the Honda is a very nice looking car and probably has some +'s over the RAV, but it defeats the object with not being PHEV

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If I had a choice I would have wished for a lesser cc. engine as most acceleration for my needs would be by assisted battery/motor. No doubt Toyota will have a reason for the 2.5ltr engine.

The RAV maybe a little outclassed by looks and as some pundits call "scratchy trim" especially for the money but the reliability, driving experience and overhaul running costs is top notch in my book.

 

 

 

 

[Mike2222]

54 minutes ago, GBgraham said:

If I had a choice I would have wished for a lesser cc. engine as most acceleration for my needs would be by assisted battery/motor. No doubt Toyota will have a reason for the 2.5ltr engine.

Obviously I can't speak for Toyota's engineering dept, but smaller engine usually means turbocharger, and that is another component to potentially break, plus the electric motors kind of do the job of a supercharger anyway, so not required. Larger capacity means a less stressed engine within a greater majority of typical use driving scenarios, and again thus less likely to fail = improved reliability. 

 

Additionally, whilst I highly doubt this is a design consideration, but I am lead to believe that the company car drivers in the UK happen to benefit notably from the 2.5L engine, as the mileage recompense/claim rates from hmrc are notably better when engine size is >2.0L, tho I will have to defer to a company car forunite to confirm/clarify this more precisely. 

[Mike2222]

2 minutes ago, Mike2222 said:

the electric motors kind of do the job of a supercharger anyway

I think, on reflection, I've slightly confused my engineering theory there, as they don't have anything to do with forced air injection etc, but they help spin up the engine to an efficient operating rpm before the fuel is needed to be introduced, removing the inefficient phase of combustion for an ICE at low engine speeds/rpm. So improves fuel efficiency more than top end power output. 

 

I'm sure more professional/knowledgeable types will advise. 

[GBgraham]

18 minutes ago, Mike2222 said:

Obviously I can't speak for Toyota's engineering dept, but smaller engine usually means turbocharger, and that is another component to potentially break, plus the electric motors kind of do the job of a supercharger anyway, so not required. Larger capacity means a less stressed engine within a greater majority of typical use driving scenarios, and again thus less likely to fail = improved reliability. 

 

Additionally, whilst I highly doubt this is a design consideration, but I am lead to believe that the company car drivers in the UK happen to benefit notably from the 2.5L engine, as the mileage recompense/claim rates from hmrc are notably better when engine size is >2.0L, tho I will have to defer to a company car forunite to confirm/clarify this more precisely. 

In giving a rough evaluation of the 2.0ltr, this is giving 223hp in the FWD C-HR + the 54hp rear motor so this is well on the way to the 302hp of the 2.5ltr.

Unless you are screaming for a 0-60 at 6 secs the option of the 2.0 would work for me.

[Flatcoat]

29 minutes ago, GBgraham said:

In giving a rough evaluation of the 2.0ltr, this is giving 223hp in the FWD C-HR + the 54hp rear motor so this is well on the way to the 302hp of the 2.5ltr.

Unless you are screaming for a 0-60 at 6 secs the option of the 2.0 would work for me.

It doesn’t work by simple addition. I would estimate around 250/260 tops. 

[Flatcoat]

The engine capacity is a balance factoring optimum efficiency, reliability, simplicity, differing market vehicle taxation policies and so on. Personally I would rather have big and lazy/unstressed low revving than small turbo charged high revving, high wear, high complexity. The RAV approach achieves just about the highest efficacy of any petrol ICE engine currently made - approaches diesel efficiency. Now, if the principals were applied to diesel imagine the potential economy! 

[ernieb]

I think the 2.5ltr has been tweaked to the point that it’s 41% (approx) efficiency at a relatively slow 2K rpm is probably one of the best in its class. 

[GBgraham]

1 hour ago, Flatcoat said:

It doesn’t work by simple addition. I would estimate around 250/260 tops. 

I do realise this, thus rough evaluation, probably as you did😉

[JDK-SL7]

The 2.5 engine means you can reclaim 25p per mile for a RAV4 plug-in as a company car which is very appealing va true cost of 2p/mile when driving first 50miles on electricity if you charge at home on a night rate tariff. 

 

So everytime you leave the house on a work journey > 50miles you make £12 plus then how economical you can be when the petrol kicks in…

 

An exceptionally good company car!