New power plant?

[Jetboy]

I would suggest to buy the hybrid if you like it, but you are highly unlikely to save money with today's hybrid technology. There are some gov't rebates that can offset this, but it depends on where you are at and what the incentive is. Even with incentives you are likely to loose money in the end.

Warning Math Below

The Rav 4 Hybrid option is $2400 and gets you a 33% increase in mileage. 30 MPG->40MPG. The option is about 1/2 the price of the original Prius vs Echo and a larger increase in MPG. So it's going the right direction.

The Rav 4 Hybrid can save $375/year, driving 15K miles with gas at $3/gal. That puts the break even at 6.4 years or 77 months. Assuming you don't drive like a bat out of hell.

I'm also not including the interest paid (est $200-$500) on the extra $2400 over the life the loan. Not to mention the extra taxes, insurance, and DMV fees for a more expensive car. All that will eat up another years worth of savings.

The average owner keeps their car 71 months. This means that the average person won't have the car long enough to recoup the cost of the hybrid option.

If you keep it longer than 77 months (6.4 years) you are ahead by $375/year. However, you will need to replace the Hybrid batteries between 8-10 years (or 100K miles) and cost can be $3K-$8K. BTW the replacement interval works out to 10K-12.5K miles per year, which is below my estimated 15K miles above. This would make net zero time between 7.7 and 9.5 years which is smack dab in the middle of the battery replacement interval.

Let's say you get 10 years on the batteries and a low ball replacement cost of $3K. $375*3.6yrs is $1350 in the bank. Best case your are still out of pocket $1650.

Of course this can change and has changed. I did the same calculation for the original Prius and the cost of ownership was about 3 or 4x this.

We used have several cars that go 50+ MPG in the 80s. They were not fast but they were in expensive and fun to drive.

Here are a few:

Honda CRX HF
Chevy Sprint 3 cylinder
Geo Metro XFi
​

However, the where low cost cars and the profits were low for everyone and they went away.

The assumptions are wrong because you're comparing 2wd Rav4 with the awd hybrid. AWD LE vs AWD LE hybrid is a more accurate comparison IMO. When you do the math with objective assumptions not seeking a predetermined outcome - the hybrid wins in almost any scenario.

The Rav4 hybrid option currently is $575. You can compare this yourself. Rav4LE AWD is $27,775. Rav4 LE hybrid AWD is $28,350.

MPG difference is 30mpg combined for the LE 40mpg combined for the LE hybrid.

The break even formula for miles driven is fuel cost per mile of the non hybrid equal to fuel cost per mile of the hybrid plus the cost difference.

In this case .03333(fuel price)(miles) = [.025(fuel price)(miles) + $575]

In this case if fuel is set to $2.50/gal the result is 27,600 miles to break even on new vehicle cost difference.

The batteries are warrantied for 10 years and 150k miles on all Toyota hybrids. So 10 years is a minimum no cost life, but typically they've been replaced around 20 years or 300k miles in actual service in larger fleets (taxi service). Generally they are never replaced in most hybrids. A reasonable actuarial value that I'd assign is let's say 5% chance of battery replacement at 10 years. Or risk adjusted value of $150 on a new vehicle.

Given that you'll save approximately $3125 in fuel during the warranty period, in the unlikely event you need a battery at that point, you're still very close to breaking even. But on a risk adjusted basis - your way ahead with the hybrid. Now - if you assume average fuel cost of $4, you're $5k ahead by that point so even with a battery replacement at year 10, it's still lower cost.

Assuming you keep it less than 10 years - the hybrid will break even with current pricing in about 2 years on fuel vs cost difference. And it'll resell for quite a bit more as well.

Using KBB - I priced two identical 3 year old Rav4 LE models. One hybrid. The other non-hybrid. The values were 22,327 vs 20,177. That's a difference in value at 3 years of $2,150. Resale value of the hybrid is significantly more than the new cost differential.

The cost to own the hybrid Rav4 is cheaper under almost every scenario when you use what I would consider the most reasonable unbiased assumptions - meaning the actual difference in price new of comparable models and value differential of resale along with a probability weighted battery replacement value.

The unknown is the actual price difference you'd pay for a new one. My guess is non-hybrids have bigger discounts anywhere that there is a supply constraint. Places where the supply is available of both are in the range of 70% or more taking the hybrid. I think the only reason not to choose a hybrid rav4 would be if you wanted the adventure model or similar that has a more capable awd system - the hybrid is not so great in more challenging terrain. - but... it's a rav4 who cares if it's good off road?

What system the 4Runner will get will probably be pretty obvious when the Tundra hybrid is finally released. Just for fun if the 4Runner were to have a hybrid that could bump it from 17mpg combined to 25mpg combined (I think very reasonable target, although I'd bet 30 is what it actually comes out as) you'd save $4700 over the first 100k miles on fuel at $2.50/gal and more like $7,500 at $4/gal. If it adds 100hp and 100ft/lbs of torque across the board, the ability to ford streams at any depth, and the ability to run as a generator at camp and use the battery for your fridge - I think the answer will be that i'll be very popular. OTOH if it's a NA 2.5L and weak hybrid with 240hp combined - I'm guessing it'll sell about as well as the 4cyl 2010 4runner did.



Side note:
The low cost fuel efficient cars went away for a few reasons.
Safety made them heavier.
And emissions requirements do not allow for lean burn engines anymore. That's what those were. A 3 way catalyitic converter requires a fuel ratio richer than stoichiometric to provide the un-burned fuel for the catalytic converter required for the NOx reductions. Use of ethanol based fuel makes this much worse. For the reaction to work properly ethanol based fuels must run approximately 30% rich. e85 for example wastes a ton of fuel to run the catalytic converter. The plus side is that the final emissions are much cleaner than the old lean-burn cars despite burning more fuel.

Dirty cheap fun cars are never coming back. But - I think cheap fun EVs are coming. And I'm guessing a few years down the road there will be some very fast cheap EVs available.

 

[itr1275]

You make good points and I get you're a hybrid fan. No worries, no judgement.

My point is that you should buy it if you like, not because you will or won't save money. If your looking at $40K+ truck you can save $25K+ off the top and buy a Nissan Versa for $12K. The $40K doesn't include the almost 10% adder for tax, license, and other fees to get it out the door.

If they make a hybrid 4runner it will because Toyota can be different and justify the $$ you spend. They don't make much money on the Yaris; however, they do make money on $40K 4runners. And they want to convince you that you can get everything thing for free.

Assumptions are always wrong that's why they are called assumptions. I used national averages and then added a bit to them. My sources are below.

AAA says national average fuel price is $2.201/gal. I used $3, padded by 36%.
AAA Gas Prices

Average miles/year is closer to 10K. I padded by ~30% to 15K.
Average miles driven per year by state - CarInsurance.com

I used the base price of the LE ($25,950) and the LE Hybrid ($28,350). These are the two lowest cost models. The hybrid forces the AWD on you. So the price is up for debate. But let's use your numbers for a minute and I will qualify my prices for comparison.

$4/gal is way high for a national average. If you live the bay area it's higher, but still close to $3 right now. However, using national average numbers its even less.

Assuming a 30% MPG increase.
10000 miles/17 mpg = 588 Gals
10000 miles/22 mpg = 454 Gals
133 Gals/year saved *$2.201/gal = $293

So your price ($575 diff) it's ~2 years to break even. So it could be better than my numbers but it far from your better than the free scenario.

With my price ($2400 diff) it's now 8.1 years.

As for resale, it is true I can buy an old ass 4wd 4runner for $4K and the same everything except 2wd for $2000. It looks like the 4wd held twice it's value, but it's really and offset of the original cost. However, what your proposing is the the hybrid system gained value, from $575 to $2,150? If that was the case Warren Buffet would be buying these things all day long.

You can take that same money you put into the hybrid system and invest it. Using the Dow Jones as a reference it was around 16,000 in 2013 and is now almost 27,000 today. Assuming you keep it for 7 years, you would have 68% return on that. So your $575 would be $836. So that $250 loss adds another year to the return. This doesn't account for the other 4% you pay in interested to Toyota from buying the hybrid.

For my $2400 pay out would $3500 today and make it even worse.

"if the 4Runner were to have a hybrid that could bump it from 17mpg combined to 25mpg combined (I think very reasonable target, although I'd bet 30 is what it actually comes out as)"

Your speculating that they will have a 47%-76% gain in MPG? The Rav 4 gaining 30% on a much lighter, smaller and aerodynamic vehicle is impressive. It unlikely they can do this with a ~5,000lb body on frame rolling box, then adding a min 250 lbs for the batteries, motors and electronics. But lets assume that they can the same 30%, it would be closer to 22 MPGs best case. More likely it would be in the 15% range.

BTW you only get Rav 4 40 MPG with the rock hard eco tires that come on the car. Assuming it will the next gen will be a hybrid, the minute that everyone swaps the eco tires for bigger A/Ts the mileage will tank. Then the winch bumper, rock rails, rack with lights. It will be more like 5% average. But I think the low speed trail mileage could go way up and give a little extra badly needed power if they allow that.

In the end best case scenario you might break even many years down the road. So it's a bet on how much you pay, how much you drive and how long you keep it.

I'm not poo pooing your opinion but I really don't see the economics of spending more to maybe save later. Very few cars are investments that gain value.

BTW Your side note is spot on and I hope they do have cheap fun cars coming back.

 

[Bumbo]

Just my opinion, but I don't see the point of in going half way.

If the goal was to get a lower total cost of ownership, maintenance, and cost per mile... why not just go all the way and buy a nice EV like a Tesla?

Not to mention all the other perks of owning one, especially as a commuter. Truly an awesome car after taking the time to compare it to any other sedan on the road.

 

[jhguth]

A lot harder to package the batteries unless it went unibody

(And yes toyota is mediocre, the 5th gen is very dated now)

 

[itr1275]

Just my opinion, but I don't see the point of in going half way.

If the goal was to get a lower total cost of ownership, maintenance, and cost per mile... why not just go all the way and buy a nice EV like a Tesla?

Not to mention all the other perks of owning one, especially as a commuter. Truly an awesome car after taking the time to compare it to any other sedan on the road.

Cost per mile would include the cost of the car driven over the life time.

If you paid $100K for a Tesla and drove 100K miles it might look something like this.
Car $100K

Insurance (10 yrs) $10K
maintenance $10K (probably low)
Fuel/Electricity $20K
$140/100miles = $1.40/mile
All in for 100K miles is $140K​

If you bought a 2 year old Nissan Leaf blower.
Car $18K

Insurance (10 yrs) $10K
maintenance $10K
Fuel/Electricity $20K
$41K/100K = $0.41/mile
All in for 100K miles is $41K
Then take the $88K you saved an invest it with a return of 115% over 10 years to get back $190K​

In the end you got a free and car put 100K miles on it and get $190K to boot.

But then the government decides you are wealthy and making too much money, so they take 1/2 (capitol gains) the $190K, leaving you with $95K in cash. Then they up your tax bracket because you made too much money that year and take another 50K. Down to $45K at this point. The brokerage wants their piece for fees and commissions and take another $30K. Which leaves you with the $15K and a 10 year Nissan Leaf. However the batteries went out in the Leaf and you have to pay $2K to get it recycled and you're down to $13K and you don't have a car at all.

Until you get a new car you have to Uber everywhere, which is another $5K. Which leaves you with $8K. You find a newer Nissan Leaf, however, it's 10 years later and they are now $50K. So you take out a loan for the other $42K + tax license etc ) $48K total. Now your $-48K in the hole. Which means you can't afford your electricity anymore, so you borrow your neighbors bicycle that gets stolen. You replace the bicycle -$4K (it was a nice bike). -$52K.

You started with $100K in cash and now 10 years later you are $45K in the hole all because you didn't buy a 4runner.

 

[02SE]

If a Suburban can get 30mpg and have great power output - 17mpg isn't really good enough. Even if we don't care about emissions, I still care about things like range and weight. Toyota has great engines. Toyota isn't putting them in the 4Runner or Tacoma. That's basically all it is. The 5.0L atkinson cycle V8 is fantastic. And it could easily be fitted along with an 8 speed auto in the 4Runner for very little manufacturing cost difference. And would likely get significantly better mpg.

The 1GR is a fine engine. It was top of class when it was introduced in 2002. In 2020 - it's not so competitive anymore. The 3rd gen 4Runner was still on sale and came with a cassette tape deck when the 1GR first started selling in Toyota models. It's a very reliable engine. But it's past time for an update to something with a much wider range of efficient power output.

The 1GR that came out in 2002 for use in the 2003 4th gen 4Runner, has little in common with the 1GR in the 5th gen 4Runner.

Sure it's a still a 4 liter V6, but almost every part of the engine has been improved. The block, the crank, the cylinder heads, the intake, etc.

 

[Bumbo]

[MENTION=166470]itr1275[/MENTION]

Our Model 3 was 37k before any state and federal tax incentives.

At 17 cents per kwh, I can charge the pack complete for $9.18, which takes me 250 miles. I use far less than that daily and it's more than enough for the daily grind.

I charge at home and never see a pump.
I get HOV access.
I literally don't have to drive it as autopilot is literally that good.

The total cost of ownership is much lower than you might think. With the mileage my wife puts on it, it's just about paid for itself.

To be honest, I could really care less if this car was electric. It's improves my experience and quality of life on the road in a way no other car is able to do. Leaf blower cant deliver the same owner experience. Comparing the two is just silly.

Money saved goes into Tesla stock, I bought my first share at $200, and you know what that looks like today... Not a bad run since their market cap is now larger than Toyota.

My point was that hybrids are confused technology... I don't care to meet it in the middle, it's an inefficient place to be. I rock 100% battery and I happily I burn dinosaurs in my 4Runner on the weekends.

 

[jhguth]

The answer to your confusion is that most people either cant afford or dont have a place to store a second vehicle, so an electric vehicle + gas vehicle for fun doesnt work for most people

 

[Bumbo]

The answer to your confusion is that most people either cant afford or dont have a place to store a second vehicle, so an electric vehicle + gas vehicle for fun doesnt work for most people

I get your point, but I still don't see a need for this on a BOF 4x4.

I also agree with your comment about unibody design and battery packs. I have personally pulled the battery packs out of salvaged EVs as a side hustle to resell to DIY powerwall builders for stationary solar storage.

There isn't anywhere to put any measurable amount of capacity in these trucks, and it's in the most vulnerable place on a 4x4. Coming down on some rocks could be an expensive lesson for a weekend warrior.

The crossover market is flooded with good hybrid options for those who just need a better work/play balance.

If they want to throw a new NA power plant into the 4R great, but I just question the value and validity of a hybrid drive in this platform.

 

[itr1275]

[MENTION=166470]itr1275[/MENTION]
To be honest, I could really care less if this car was electric. It's improves my experience and quality of life on the road in a way no other car is able to do. Leaf blower cant deliver the same owner experience. Comparing the two is just silly.

I'm not quite sure how we got here? The post started as a prediction that Toyota will do a hybrid drive train. But anyway here we are, out in the weeds, looking for the elusive Ribbon-tailed Astrapia.

Said like a true Teslanian. You must be in my neighborhood, land of the Tesla and people that own Tesla stock.

Yes comparing the Leaf and Tesla is silly as that entire post is silly. But don't frown on Leaf people, they will take over the world with all the money they save. You and I, we're screwed because we spend way too much on cars.

The point of that post is you will never make money on a car. None the less get a car to "pay for itself. If they did, as I said before, Warren Buffet would be buying fleets of them.

Even collectable cars loose money all the time. People buy an old car dump $100K in to it and sell it $80K. That doesn't account for the 500 hours of labor they put into it either. Even if you bought it new you and put $0 into it you would loose money.

They buy cars because they want to and they enjoy it. As you should enjoy your car and I'm glad you do. However, a Tesla is not for everyone. I won't buy a Tesla just because of the lack of real buttons and knobs.

The hybrid is an odd duck, but it bridges a gap. If everyone had an EV and charged it every day, we wouldn't be able to supply enough juice. People are working on that but it takes 20 years to build a power plant. But then why should they build it if there is no demand. Chicken and the egg.

 

[Jetboy]

The 1GR that came out in 2002 for use in the 2003 4th gen 4Runner, has little in common with the 1GR in the 5th gen 4Runner.

Sure it's a still a 4 liter V6, but almost every part of the engine has been improved. The block, the crank, the cylinder heads, the intake, etc.

All true. I don't think it should still be called a 1GR. They share IIRC crank bearings. That's the only part I remember them being shared.

That said - they're still basically identical in bore/stroke. And they appear to be identical or very similar in tune throughout the low-mid rpms range. If you compare the power output the only real difference is at the top end of the RPM range. And the 1.2GR is still pretty poorly balanced for a modern v6. It's not smooth and doesn't like to be up at the higher rpms. The 3.5L is much smoother at higher rpms due to the shorter stroke and better balancing.

 

[Quentin]

The assumptions are wrong because you're comparing 2wd Rav4 with the awd hybrid. AWD LE vs AWD LE hybrid is a more accurate comparison IMO. When you do the math with objective assumptions not seeking a predetermined outcome - the hybrid wins in almost any scenario.

The Rav4 hybrid option currently is $575. You can compare this yourself. Rav4LE AWD is $27,775. Rav4 LE hybrid AWD is $28,350.

MPG difference is 30mpg combined for the LE 40mpg combined for the LE hybrid.

The break even formula for miles driven is fuel cost per mile of the non hybrid equal to fuel cost per mile of the hybrid plus the cost difference.

In this case .03333(fuel price)(miles) = [.025(fuel price)(miles) + $575]

In this case if fuel is set to $2.50/gal the result is 27,600 miles to break even on new vehicle cost difference.

The batteries are warrantied for 10 years and 150k miles on all Toyota hybrids. So 10 years is a minimum no cost life, but typically they've been replaced around 20 years or 300k miles in actual service in larger fleets (taxi service). Generally they are never replaced in most hybrids. A reasonable actuarial value that I'd assign is let's say 5% chance of battery replacement at 10 years. Or risk adjusted value of $150 on a new vehicle.

Given that you'll save approximately $3125 in fuel during the warranty period, in the unlikely event you need a battery at that point, you're still very close to breaking even. But on a risk adjusted basis - your way ahead with the hybrid. Now - if you assume average fuel cost of $4, you're $5k ahead by that point so even with a battery replacement at year 10, it's still lower cost.

Assuming you keep it less than 10 years - the hybrid will break even with current pricing in about 2 years on fuel vs cost difference. And it'll resell for quite a bit more as well.

Using KBB - I priced two identical 3 year old Rav4 LE models. One hybrid. The other non-hybrid. The values were 22,327 vs 20,177. That's a difference in value at 3 years of $2,150. Resale value of the hybrid is significantly more than the new cost differential.

The cost to own the hybrid Rav4 is cheaper under almost every scenario when you use what I would consider the most reasonable unbiased assumptions - meaning the actual difference in price new of comparable models and value differential of resale along with a probability weighted battery replacement value.

The unknown is the actual price difference you'd pay for a new one. My guess is non-hybrids have bigger discounts anywhere that there is a supply constraint. Places where the supply is available of both are in the range of 70% or more taking the hybrid. I think the only reason not to choose a hybrid rav4 would be if you wanted the adventure model or similar that has a more capable awd system - the hybrid is not so great in more challenging terrain. - but... it's a rav4 who cares if it's good off road?

What system the 4Runner will get will probably be pretty obvious when the Tundra hybrid is finally released. Just for fun if the 4Runner were to have a hybrid that could bump it from 17mpg combined to 25mpg combined (I think very reasonable target, although I'd bet 30 is what it actually comes out as) you'd save $4700 over the first 100k miles on fuel at $2.50/gal and more like $7,500 at $4/gal. If it adds 100hp and 100ft/lbs of torque across the board, the ability to ford streams at any depth, and the ability to run as a generator at camp and use the battery for your fridge - I think the answer will be that i'll be very popular. OTOH if it's a NA 2.5L and weak hybrid with 240hp combined - I'm guessing it'll sell about as well as the 4cyl 2010 4runner did.



Side note:
The low cost fuel efficient cars went away for a few reasons.
Safety made them heavier.
And emissions requirements do not allow for lean burn engines anymore. That's what those were. A 3 way catalyitic converter requires a fuel ratio richer than stoichiometric to provide the un-burned fuel for the catalytic converter required for the NOx reductions. Use of ethanol based fuel makes this much worse. For the reaction to work properly ethanol based fuels must run approximately 30% rich. e85 for example wastes a ton of fuel to run the catalytic converter. The plus side is that the final emissions are much cleaner than the old lean-burn cars despite burning more fuel.

Dirty cheap fun cars are never coming back. But - I think cheap fun EVs are coming. And I'm guessing a few years down the road there will be some very fast cheap EVs available.

The Hybrid Rav4 is a much better car to drive than the conventional version, IMO. The Prime appears to be even better than the hybrid. I agree that the only downside of the hybrid is the AWD system. That said, there is no reason that power can't go through a traditional transfer case in a hybrid 4Runner versus doing the decoupled AWD setup of the Rav4.

As an aside, while I don't think it is coming, but I'd be all over a 4Runner Prime. I put 900 miles on my 4Runner from Saturday through Wednesday driving through WV state parks and various outdoors jaunts. Having the ability to just put gas in and keep trucking is fantastic for the things I like to do. Being able to commute largely gas free and have an 80hp bump would let me have my cake and eat it, too. The only real downside is the weight gain that comes with the batteries. The Rav4 Prime is ~400lbs heavier than the hybrid model. At least the 4Runner seems to have considerable space for the sizable battery.

 

[itr1275]

I get your point, but I still don't see a need for this on a BOF 4x4.

A unibody cross over is a different class of vehicle. If you really want to go deep off road then you will spend a bunch of money and you won't want to bash your very expensive Land Rover Evoque, Audi Q4, Porsche Macan, etc on some big rocks or go desert blasting.

With all that in mind you sacrifice handling and gas mileage for BOF. So you have to choose what you want to do with it.

I see a few reasons the T4R is still BOF and needs to stay that way.

The first is rigidity. I might be completely wrong (not a automotive rigidity engineer here), but I don't believe that you can get the same rigidity out of a unibody car that weighs nearly 5000lbs in stock trim unlaidened.

If you put a jack under one corner of any unibody car and open the door you will see and feel the flex. You do the same to a modern BOF truck, it shouldn't care.

Why do we care about stress flex? Because eventually it leads to rattles and squeaks from loosened joints and spot welds. That leads to failures and complaints. Some hard off roading in a unibody will ruin it.

You could save some weight by using unibody but there is more. . .

Next we have the durability of the undercarriage. You can easily lift/jack a BOF truck from just about any solid point underneath it. With a unibody you need be deliberate about where you place jacks and jackstands. It's what you might call delicate. You can add skid plates to the unibody but it's additional weight and you would also need solid mounting points every 30 cm or so. Which is sort of a frame.

Third is you can't do a body lift on a unibody. Not that people do much of this, but it is an option for what it's worth.

Fourth is towing capacity. Most crossovers I've seen are limited to 3500lbs or less. The T4R is not a towing beast but it's a respectable 5000 lbs. You can tow a reasonable size car or a large boat.

The last and very important part is you cannot easily modify a unibody. The off road community loves their mods. The ability to stick a metal bumper on there, rock sliders or even cut the body to shreds is a fact. I welded my rock sliders on my Taco to the frame. You can't really weld to thin sheet metal. To do the same you would need a set of plates to distribute the force and weld them in strategically. Or you drill though the metal with plates on both sides. This is how we put roll cages in modern cars. The difference is roll cages are single use and the have been known to break welds and punch through metal.

There are very few unibody off road vehicles (with a 4Lo transfer case) for a many reasons. The only one I think might have 4lo is the VW Touareg?

If it could be done reliably and still be affordable Toyota would be all over it.

 

[Jetboy]

The Hybrid Rav4 is a much better car to drive than the conventional version, IMO. The Prime appears to be even better than the hybrid. I agree that the only downside of the hybrid is the AWD system. That said, there is no reason that power can't go through a traditional transfer case in a hybrid 4Runner versus doing the decoupled AWD setup of the Rav4.

As an aside, while I don't think it is coming, but I'd be all over a 4Runner Prime. I put 900 miles on my 4Runner from Saturday through Wednesday driving through WV state parks and various outdoors jaunts. Having the ability to just put gas in and keep trucking is fantastic for the things I like to do. Being able to commute largely gas free and have an 80hp bump would let me have my cake and eat it, too. The only real downside is the weight gain that comes with the batteries. The Rav4 Prime is ~400lbs heavier than the hybrid model. At least the 4Runner seems to have considerable space for the sizable battery.

If there is ever a 4Runner prime - I'm in. Give me 40 miles of EV range and say 400hp combined with a 300hp v6. And price it reasonably comparably to the Prime vs normal Rav. If Toyota does that with the tundra - they'll probably sell just as well as the rav prime. Apparently Toyota only allocated the first year's production to 11 states that have EV requirements and even with that limit all of 2021's production is already taken. So for me to get one I'll have to find one in California, or wait until at least the 2022 model year to order one from my local dealers.

Interestingly - The model Y had a price cut and now is offering a cheap lease option... I suspected the Rav Prime would cut heavily into Model Y sales. Seems early to already be having trouble selling the Y though. The Rav is a better mousetrap. If it ever gets into full production I think they'll sell a shit ton of them.

 

[Quentin]

If there is ever a 4Runner prime - I'm in. Give me 40 miles of EV range and say 400hp combined with a 300hp v6. And price it reasonably comparably to the Prime vs normal Rav. If Toyota does that with the tundra - they'll probably sell just as well as the rav prime. Apparently Toyota only allocated the first year's production to 11 states that have EV requirements and even with that limit all of 2021's production is already taken. So for me to get one I'll have to find one in California, or wait until at least the 2022 model year to order one from my local dealers.

Interestingly - The model Y had a price cut and now is offering a cheap lease option... I suspected the Rav Prime would cut heavily into Model Y sales. Seems early to already be having trouble selling the Y though. The Rav is a better mousetrap. If it ever gets into full production I think they'll sell a shit ton of them.

I’d definitely be in with those stats.

Supposedly Toyota will have capacity for 20k per year after model year 2021 (which is, like you said, limited to 5000 units in particular markets).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mscot]

Wife has a new Rav4 hybrid. It's great for the price and perfect for what we use it for - driving around town with occasional non-outdoors trips to the mtns.
It has a better torque to weight ratio and transmission so it's more enjoyable to drive in the mtns than the 4runner which ends up in 3rd gear the entire f**king time.
The hybrids drive far better than the regular rav4 and since I live in CO a 2wd car was never an option so, yes, the cost difference really was ~$500 which is a bargain.

 

[CO-Cygnus]

Wife has a new Rav4 hybrid. It's great for the price and perfect for what we use it for - driving around town with occasional non-outdoors trips to the mtns.
It has a better torque to weight ratio and transmission so it's more enjoyable to drive in the mtns than the 4runner which ends up in 3rd gear the entire f**king time.
The hybrids drive far better than the regular rav4 and since I live in CO a 2wd car was never an option so, yes, the cost difference really was ~$500 which is a bargain.

Anything with an electric motor or turbo is going to perform better at Altitude here compared to the 1GR. I'll go for the Hybrid or Turbo 10/10 times over a comparably powered NA engine.

 

[Jetboy]

I’d definitely be in with those stats.

Supposedly Toyota will have capacity for 20k per year after model year 2021 (which is, like you said, limited to 5000 units in particular markets).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I hope this is wrong. 20k per year is maybe 10% of what they should be producing at best. I think they'd sell more like 200K or more units if they'd make them. IMO the rav4 prime is Toyota's ford Bronco in it's own market - hit it out of the park on everything in the CUV world. But 20k units is really disappointing if that's the case. It checks every box for me as a people mover. And I want to buy one as soon as they're actually available in my state, which now is looking like at least 2022.

The new Venza is the same way. Although kinda meh to me, they said that they had planned on around 3k sales per month as a target and then got orders for 50k in the first few days of opening up the dealer order system.

 

[itr1275]

The new Venza is the same way. Although kinda meh to me, they said that they had planned on around 3k sales per month as a target and then got orders for 50k in the first few days of opening up the dealer order system.

Yeah I never understood the Venza. They have the Highlander and the Lexus RX350. All three are on the same. Maybe it's supposed to be the Camary Wagon?

 

[Jetboy]

Yeah I never understood the Venza. They have the Highlander and the Lexus RX350. All three are on the same. Maybe it's supposed to be the Camary Wagon?

It used to be that the RX350 and Harrier were the same model with different names. 2011 Harrier looks pretty familiar right?

And then around 2014 or so the harrier was updated to a new generation based on the Rav4's new TNGA platform while the RX got a facelift and otherwise stayed the same and - even to this day the RX hasn't updated it's platform and still is essentially a carryover on the older K platform since at least 2010.

Now that they're different, Toyota is bringing the Harrier back to the USA under the old name of Venza. **** - why not just call it an FJ Cruiser? Since we're recycling names...

Anyway - yeah, it's basically what the Fortuner is to the 3rd gen 4Runner - the real successor while the USA got a bigger version. The Harrier is a same-size successor to the earlier RX models where the USA version got bigger. So it's half way between a Rav/NX and an RX/Highlander in size and a big jump up in luxury from the Rav. Probably right on par with the RX interior wise. Do we need another one in the middle? no. I don't think it fills any gap in terms of size - but offers a Toyota branded luxury midsize SUV that the RAV and Highlander don't really do. Kinda like the Avalon/Camry/ES350. This is the Avalon to the RX/Highlander.