2014 Toyota RAV4 Compact Crossover Review and Road Test

2014 Toyota RAV4 Compact Crossover Review and Road Test

The big change for 2014 out back. It’s not what you see, it’s what you don’t. The spare tire that clung to the back of the 2013 model like an octogenarian cl…



zytv says:

2014 nissan rogue much better interior-exterior.toyota interior so crappy
and fake.btw road noise is terrible such as crv.

DreadlockDrummer says:

i normally like rav4s, i dont like this rav4

Moneyneversaves says:

i have previous 2007 rav4 and love it.
looking at this new rav4, i feel like toyota made the dashboard higher, and
the front hood looks wider and bigger. i am just wondering how is the
visability. i was ecited when Toyota planned to upgrade the design and was
hoping to trade my old car with the new rav4 but looking at this one I am
concerned. Maybe the new 2014 toyota higlander can be good choice. 

Bob Keilitz says:

I drive a ’12 Rav4 I4 Base with the wheel upgrade. I like the interior
more on this model, and I like the addition of the 6 spd tranny. I don’t
like how they finished off the cladding on the front. Looks like two big
fangs. Would have preferred them bringing more body color down around the
grill. Too bad about the loss of “straight line” ride comfort. My ’12
rides better than my wife’s Camry . . . maybe due to the bigger wheels. My
hood does that flappy thing too. Yes, annoying.

Vladimir Miangolarra says:

when i look at most reviews, i have a feeling that most people are so
delicate today. problems with the seat because it doesn’t have a lumbar
support or the tail gate being to big so you have to lean onthe hood?
people should focus on important stuff. mpg and cost to own over 5 years.
and of course price. and remember all cars are made for specific people. 

Moneyneversaves says:

Front looks too granny car. I wish it had a front look of Nissan rogue or
bmw x6 but they made this rav4 looks like banged up frog. Also they made it
too low for ground clearance and destroyed the understanding of crossover.
Crossover means you will take this car to off-road sometime or somehow but
how could perform well if your ground clearance is too low. i like the
interior but exterior, not really. i think it is too granny looking

Delmar Mack says:

Front looks like a Pontiac Minivan….

Landrew0 says:

Toyota’s greatest advantage over the years has been the way it has turned
away from the traditional exploitation tactics pioneered by Detroit

Options: they don’t soak you for the options you want quite as much.
Reliability: they don’t bank on selling you lots of repairs and parts.

The result has been a steady climb from tariff-challenged import to #1
automaker in the world. Detroit, pay closer attention.

serge vivier says:

No rear seat air vent, really most other suv in this class have them.

Sean Naughton says:

I know its not important but it bugs me he always says the drink holders
can hold certain size “sodas” instead of “drinks” or “beverages”.. WTH?

Ganapati Hegde says:

The front looks superb !

todd baker says:

Do you measure cabin noise in all your tests? Which compact crossover was
the quietest?

Italiaciao1 says:

Toyota RAV4 is a fat bulldog body!

George Lopez says:

Your reviews are awesome. Cant wait for your review on the 2014 Nissan
Rogue. I’m in the market for small SUV and keep going back sand forth
between RAV4 and CX-5. And now the new Rogue has caught my eye. Also love
the Forester, but fully loaded top model is few K more than I want to
spend. Unlike many, infotainment is a big deal to me, hence the CX-5 is a
turn off in that aspect alone. Am leaning towards Toyota’s Entune, but the
washout is a concern. So CX-5 is better handling but the infotainment on
the RAV4 is more appealing to me. I feel the CX-5 is a better value because
of its features (ie. real leather, adaptive head lights, front collision
warning, etc.) Narrowing it down to one vehicle is really becoming a

Tom Fredrickson says:

OK, so this IS the 2014 model. It’s good to have that clarified as things
seems to be changing so quickly in this category of vehicles. Mazda was my
favorite, based on reviews like yours. Thanks.

Reviews now have my attention focused on The 2014 Ford Escape for the
following reasons; Fun to drive, comparatively lower cabin noise, on par
fuel economy and 3500 pound tow rating with appropriate engine. I would
like to see a lower MSRP for the mid-level package though.

I’m looking forward to seeing more 2014 & 2015 reviews of the small
SUV/crossover category. 

Hamster Song says:

Good review, Is this a quality built.

HowsaBowsaYowsa says:

the one thing that always bothered me about the RAV4 is the nearly
non-existant bumper especially in the back. I kept waiting for toyota to
put something beefier back there never happened though.

marco polo says:

What a retarded design with the hatch protruding so far back. Why does
Toyota ‘almost’ get it every time but fucks it up with ugly angles or
something similar…?

Khanh Pham says:

Headlight is ugly, the back is better those !


I think it looks cool but it has grown on me

Hugh Gabriel says:

You know you have a detailed review when you click on a 25mn long video.
Alex, you are the best!

Dan M says:

While test driving this RAV4 I found the speedometer too far below the
dash. When checking speed your have to look down. I prefer the gauge
cluster to be just below the dash. This was a deal breaker for me.

serge vivier says:

The Rav 4 does no shine off road, the Forester and Tiguan are better. More
importantly, the IIHS safety testing have rated the Rav 4 the worst in this
segment. Comments have been made that Toyota have a lot of work to do to
catch up to the competition.

Tom Fredrickson says:


Are you reviewing the 2013 or 2014 model? Video title says 2014, but you
refer to it as 2013 at 11:50.

Which is noisier to you, 2014 Mazda CX-5 or Toyota Rav4? Consumer Reports
believes the CX-5 is noisier.

You indicate a 4 foot wide item will fit in the back and then comment that
8 ft long items would prevent the hatch from closing completely, implying a
sheet of plywood could be put in the back. On 11/16/13 I measured the width
between the wheel wells at a showroom floor model and their width is well
short of 4 ft wide. The rear opening at the bottom might be 4 ft, but I
don’t think you can get a sheet of plywood past the wheel wells. The rear
opening narrows as you approach the height needed to clear the wheel wells.
Approx depth to back of the front seat is 6 feet.

theonething0107 says:

Just bought same exact one in silver. FANTASTIC!! Very peppy, sporty,
sprightely, and solid on the road. Highly recommended.

Burnpro Burn says:

is this a 2013 or 2014? he keeps saying 2013 but title says 2014.

trail gnome says:

You give great reviews and include technical explanations that you cannot
find in other reviews. I appreciate your sensibilities when giving your
opinion about overall car appeal . Keep it up!

lexusfan100 says:

ya i have to agree that the front and the interior has lot of stuff going
on ..don’t like it

Alex on Autos says:

We’re working on it 🙂

TheCartoonEngine says:

which one is better? this Toyota Rav4 2014 or the new Subaru Forester 2014?

nancy williams says:

GREAT detailed review! U said the mazda cr5 rides smoother than the Rav and
you are the only reviewer to say that. All others say cabin noise and ride
is more of a luxury ride in the RAV than any other small SUV. Im looking
for low road noise and smooth ride. Can you clarify which you think is best
for that? Do you have a review of the Mazda (didn’t see it on your list).
Is road noise of the Honda CRV same as the RAV? thanks for the great

crackaddict444 says:

This is so much nicer than the lump that is the CR-V

Digger Nick says:

Worried? What about the 140hp 2.0l cvt? Must be slower than a snail going

falconseye123 says:

good review ,, thanks alot ..

Dark0blivion says:

Alex, I noticed that you mentioned several major competitors in this
review, but you didn’t mention any Subarus. Was that an oversight or do you
not rank them well? As always though, thank you for doing a thorough
review. So many car “reviewers” upload 4 to 6 minute “reviews” that include
a very sparse amount of information. It baffles me why major auto
manufacturers even bother flying them out to press events. You deserve to
be there more than them!

dlwilliams10 says:

Good review! terrible car

jvrdlc says:

great review, but hey Toyota, why the FUCK did you remove the V6 engine?
you know there are consumers who rather have power on the small SUV class.
by fucking us up like this, you are making them getting a V6 or Turbo 4
from your competition.. SAD

marjomjom says:

How heavy this small suv? Worried that has only 176 hp.

PussMag says:

I will buy it when they are going to paint the rear bumper


Why no mention of the Subaru Forester at all?

Mayank Garg says:

Hi, how does it compare to Ford Edge 2013 SEL model? Ford looks like more
loaded as compared to RAV 4. Do you have a similar review for Edge? Want to
choose between the two cars

kaitoyzc says:

Looking forward for you to review a Tiguan. Great Channel!

Nova_Eleanore says:

you are seriously my new favorite car channel! thank you for all the
awesome reviews 🙂

Michael Schaner says:

You mentioned there were no V6’s left in this segment. What about the Chevy
Equinox and the GMC Terrain? They still have the 3.6 as an option for 2014.

VMATT500C says:

Excellent, review.

jorge romani says:

man, those Toyota cars are boring

Alex on Autos says:

It really depends on what you’re after. I would personally probably chose
the Subaru over the Toyota but it’s going to be a little less reliable
according to the statistics and perhaps slightly less efficient in the AWD
models as well. (Real world numbers.) I’m doing my best to get a hold of
the Forester for a complete review but no firm dates yet.

Gabriel Choi says:

i love these long ttac reviews so informative

Stukey5000 says:

Great review

Stephen Hendricks says:

OK. I’m completely confused. The title of the video is “2014 Toyota
RAV4…” yet the entire video appears to be about the 2013 model. Is the
2014 model available for review? A mistake in the title of the review? A
reissue of a previous review? Inquiring minds want to know.

Write a comment