Any cross shopping with the 2019 RAV4?

Better value? The RAV4 offers more cargo/rear leg room, way better MPG, wireless charging, panoramic sun roof, drive mode selector, better resale and likely better long-term reliability. And who really uses the factory NAV anyway? That's supposed to be an advantage?

Mazda's advantages are better looks, better driving dynamics and more power. Things which are low priority for most families.

Personally I think the value on both is about the same, just depends on what your needs are. And the reality is people are going to value the RAV4's advantages over the Mazda. The RAV4 Hybrid gets insane MPG and puts the diesel CX-5 to shame.

I personally like the rugged look of the RAV4, but Iv'e watched the reviews on it and see a lot of complaints regarding the buzzy engine noise and the fact that you really need to step on it for it to get going, but I doubt most families care about that.

I'd personally get the CX-5 Sig but if I had a wife and kids I'd probably get a RAV4 or Forester.

I would rate driving dynamics, power, looks as the top 3 for me..
 
One of my friends is cross-shopping it. Background:

-Looks like a model, cheered for some pro-level sports teams, comes from a 6-figure income job, now works as a motivational type personality/life coach.

Chose the RAV Hybrid. She road-trips a lot and the 40mpg as well as the much more appealing styling (to her) won it over. 2-toned white/black.

I did marry a sugar mama...but damn how do I upgrade ?LOL!!!

Disclaimer if wifey is reading this....just joking :)
 
I did marry a sugar mama...but damn how do I upgrade ?LOL!!!

Disclaimer if wifey is reading this....just joking :)

Haha, she's cool, not my type, but we're still friends. Never dated her, or even hit on her. I make my own money and don't really need anyone else's. The last girl I dated who made more than me made about 350/year, and it was really cool to see the house she was building, etc. but I'm very comfortable where I'm at, and only working 3 days a week, I can afford the things I want in life, so...good 'nuff!

That said, I do have friends that did marry uber rich women. Early 6 figures isn't very impressive though, in the scheme of things, and it doesn't go nearly as far as you THINK it will, trust me. You need to find you someone at minimum at the 250/year point, at least. Especially in Glendale, if you want it to be a "worth it!" situation, regardless of their other traits, IMO

"You can't choose your mother, but you can pick your mamma!"

Again though, my girlfriend makes about $30K/ year. Doesn't mean anything to me what she does or doesn't make, long as she's happy.
 
Last edited:
Yes, better value. See here:

https://www.mazdas247.com/forum/sho...he-2019-RAV4&p=6655863&viewfull=1#post6655863

You need to load up the Rav to get what you get standard in the CX-5. And paying $34K and getting fake leather seats (pleather, aka plastic leather) doesn't appeal to me.


It isn't an apples to apples comparison. The CX-5 has one of the smallest interiors in the class. It gets cramped sitting in the back if you're taller and it's cargo area is smaller then most in the class. People buy these vehicles for their space. And whatever features the CX-5 has that the RAV4 doesn't have is offset with the features the RAV4 has which the Mazda does not.

I also think the majority of people who buy these types of vehicles care if it's real leather or pleather as long as it feels the same.
 
It isn't an apples to apples comparison. The CX-5 has one of the smallest interiors in the class. It gets cramped sitting in the back if you're taller and it's cargo area is smaller then most in the class. People buy these vehicles for their space. And whatever features the CX-5 has that the RAV4 doesn't have is offset with the features the RAV4 has which the Mazda does not.

I also think the majority of people who buy these types of vehicles care if it's real leather or pleather as long as it feels the same.
Mazda isn't making a car for most people. Even Mazda President has said that same thing. I have seen a lot of Rav4s with steel wheels and it looks embarrassingly bad. Same with base model Corolla's.
Second point about cargo and volume - if you are hauling hay / farm feed etc. then yes, total cargo makes sense but otherwise difference between Rav4 and CX5 wouldn't impact you most of the time. But every time you drive the car - driving matters >>>>>>>>>> cargo. Cargo / volume only becomes an issue when it is beyond certain practical number see CX-3. CX-5 is in a sweet spot. It has acceptable cargo #s, but if you want to drive an 8 spd penalty box with jerky transmission just for cargo - you can.
 
Mazda isn't making a car for most people. Even Mazda President has said that same thing. I have seen a lot of Rav4s with steel wheels and it looks embarrassingly bad. Same with base model Corolla's.
Second point about cargo and volume - if you are hauling hay / farm feed etc. then yes, total cargo makes sense but otherwise difference between Rav4 and CX5 wouldn't impact you most of the time. But every time you drive the car - driving matters >>>>>>>>>> cargo. Cargo / volume only becomes an issue when it is beyond certain practical number see CX-3. CX-5 is in a sweet spot. It has acceptable cargo #s, but if you want to drive an 8 spd penalty box with jerky transmission just for cargo - you can.

It's good for the witness protection program. So anonymous, no one will ever look twice at it.

943cd6f0238f4d9e96cdd794dcec3cf5.jpg
 
Mazda isn't making a car for most people. Even Mazda President has said that same thing. I have seen a lot of Rav4s with steel wheels and it looks embarrassingly bad. Same with base model Corolla's.
Second point about cargo and volume - if you are hauling hay / farm feed etc. then yes, total cargo makes sense but otherwise difference between Rav4 and CX5 wouldn't impact you most of the time. But every time you drive the car - driving matters >>>>>>>>>> cargo. Cargo / volume only becomes an issue when it is beyond certain practical number see CX-3. CX-5 is in a sweet spot. It has acceptable cargo #s, but if you want to drive an 8 spd penalty box with jerky transmission just for cargo - you can.


If Mazda isn't producing cars for most people, then they better start fast because their August sales were in the tank and their stock price is down nearly 70% from 5 years ago. And your right cargo space/rear leg room doesn't matter to ME, but then again I have no wife and kids but most people that buy these SUV's do.

8 speed penalty box with jerky transmission? I'd rather take that over my engine parts literally falling out of place like the cylinder deactivation causes in the 2.5 NA.

Anyway, I'd take the CX 2.5 Sig over a RAV4 but then again, I don't have a need for the extra space that the rest of the class offer.
 
They're not going bankrupt anytime soon. They're just not delivering enough profits for the investors.

Their August sales are fine, IMO. YTD is down. Big drop in sedan interest. They've delivered ~190,000 vehicles in the U.S year to date compared to ~214,000 last year. They do not sell as many cars as Toyota or Honda but they are a smaller company. https://insidemazda.mazdausa.com/pre...sales-results/

If you choose your car based on the stock price then I recommend Ferrari.
 
They're not going bankrupt anytime soon. They're just not delivering enough profits for the investors.

Their August sales are fine, IMO. YTD is down. Big drop in sedan interest. They've delivered ~190,000 vehicles in the U.S year to date compared to ~214,000 last year. They do not sell as many cars as Toyota or Honda but they are a smaller company. https://insidemazda.mazdausa.com/pre...sales-results/

If you choose your car based on the stock price then I recommend Ferrari.


Subaru is smaller than Mazda and sells twice as many vehicles as Mazda. Size of company has nothing to do with it.
 
Lol, that proves the point. They're all the same. Shooting brake concept with company specific headlight and bumper configuration.

I thought your point was all CUV's looked the same and made you appear "anonymous". Jaguar and Maserati do not fit that mold, IMO.
 
I tell you what.

I hate the way Toyota has that configurator set up. Trying to get what you want--and figuring out the differences between a dozen variations--is insanity.

And it seems that each of the myriad variants is missing at least one thing that you want.

Toyota and their add-ons / packages are the worst. They should just list kitchen sink, and be done with it. I still remember a few years back looking at one dealer, who was apparently preparing for the big one, because every car had a first aid kit in them.

Go to the inventory search, they won't tell you what dealer has what, but you'll get to see that there isn't a single XLE Hybrid, for example that doesn't have a package in your general area. Or, there's no Limited without the Entune upgrade. You have to factory order the damn things to get nothing on the damn things.

The hybrid is a hit, good car, gonna be a couple more hybrids this year, explorer, maybe CRV hybrid, so the competition is going to get tougher in this segment.
 
I thought your point was all CUV's looked the same and made you appear "anonymous". Jaguar and Maserati do not fit that mold, IMO.

I think they do. Saw a Levante at work the other day and it actually looked pretty tame. Same for the jags. They're all the same unless you're "into cars".
 
I didn't cross shop the Rav4 but I did just spend 22 days driving one as the CX-5 was in the body shop. (a tale for another day)

My impressions of the Rav4
it feels big. Bigger than it is and that's not necessarily a good thing. It definitely has more cargo room and the driver seat seems to go back further than the CX-5 (which for a guy 6'5 I welcomed that)
But honestly that's really where the plusses end.

Suspension is soft and doesn't inspire any confidence at all in a turn under medium load.
No Android Auto, instead it wanted me to download some Toyota app suite that as a 1 star rating. No thanks.
8 speed? Why Toyota.
Oh and why SO many different colors on the dash? I missed the simplistic approach Mazda took. this thing has orange, green, blue, white, etc. Just seems like they didn't put much thought into the subtle pieces of this vehicle.

would I recommend one?
If you needed more cargo room and MPG was high on your list, Yeah I might. It's an upgrade to the old rav4 but if want a touch more class and a sportier car we all know what the better choice is.


side note: put over 3,000 miles on it and it averaged around 32 mpg in mixed driving so gotta give Toyoyta credit for that. (although it did seem underpowered)
 
All I know is I had Rav4 yes it had cargo space, went to a Forester yes it had cargo space and a good awd system and now I'm sitting in the CX 5 GT Turbo. IMHO it the best of the 3. I will say from pure driving enjoyment, the CX 5 wins hands down. Not that the others were bad, just CX 5 is better. Also the difference in mpg over the difference in experience is worth the extra few dollars cost.
 
^^^ yup.
also, getting back into my CX-5 last night I was reminded how quiet the interior (and engine) is compared to the Rav4.
 
I didn't cross shop the Rav4 but I did just spend 22 days driving one as the CX-5 was in the body shop. (a tale for another day)

My impressions of the Rav4
it feels big. Bigger than it is and that's not necessarily a good thing. It definitely has more cargo room and the driver seat seems to go back further than the CX-5 (which for a guy 6'5 I welcomed that)
But honestly that's really where the plusses end.

Suspension is soft and doesn't inspire any confidence at all in a turn under medium load.
No Android Auto, instead it wanted me to download some Toyota app suite that as a 1 star rating. No thanks.
8 speed? Why Toyota.
Oh and why SO many different colors on the dash? I missed the simplistic approach Mazda took. this thing has orange, green, blue, white, etc. Just seems like they didn't put much thought into the subtle pieces of this vehicle.

would I recommend one?
If you needed more cargo room and MPG was high on your list, Yeah I might. It's an upgrade to the old rav4 but if want a touch more class and a sportier car we all know what the better choice is.


side note: put over 3,000 miles on it and it averaged around 32 mpg in mixed driving so gotta give Toyoyta credit for that. (although it did seem underpowered)

They shouldnt even sell the gas version at this point except for rentals. The hybrid is better in every way: quieter, faster and better MPG.
 
Back