|
|
Post by Paulus17 on Jul 28, 2021 15:11:28 GMT
Our eldest daughter is now after a Rav around the 2015-17 model, petrol automatic with four wheel drive.
Are there any issues with that year model?
|
|
|
|
Post by firemac on Jul 28, 2021 15:42:22 GMT
Our eldest daughter is now after a Rav around the 2015-17 model, petrol automatic with four wheel drive. Are there any issues with that year model? I think that would be a 4.4 (2013-2019). AFAIK the petrol autos were CVTs similar to the drivetrain in the 4.3. I did test drive a 4.3 petrol auto and I was impressed by how well the box performed vs a torque converter auto, which I am very used to having had 4 of them by then. The 4.4 seems to have a very good reputation but the vvt-i engine is unlikely to be much more economical than in your 4.2. But of course it pays you back with stellar reliability. Have to looked to see if WCVC have any? |
|
|
|
Post by philip42h on Jul 28, 2021 16:22:47 GMT
As above, 2015-17 would be a 4.4 and you'd have the choice of a 2.0 V-matic CVT or a 2.5 VVTi hybrid (also CVT-ish). There's nowt wrong with the old 2.0 but I'd go hybrid in a heartbeat if that were an available / affordable option ...
|
|
|
|
Post by unclebob on Jul 28, 2021 17:52:55 GMT
Our eldest daughter is now after a Rav around the 2015-17 model, petrol automatic with four wheel drive. Are there any issues with that year model? It’s a model I keep an eye on ..not that many to choose from if wanting the facelift petrol only model . |
|
|
|
Post by clarki on Jul 29, 2021 7:06:24 GMT
It's the constant drone you get from the CVT that rules out those 'boxes for me. Don't know what it's like in a Rav but in a Yaris it's terrible.
+ they're not cheap!! You're at CX5 money and it's a nicer car/better drive.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigkev on Jul 29, 2021 8:07:33 GMT
As Clarki said…….have only driven a CVT Yaris, and what an annoying constant noise it made, with gear changes not smooth at all. Keich.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paulus17 on Jul 29, 2021 8:29:36 GMT
Thanks for the replies folks much appreciated :TU: After been given the runaround all day yesterday with a 16 plate petrol at Steven Eagell Birmingham she is going to look at an 18 plate Petrol Hybrid later on today, which i have been saying all the time to consider, but it took a salesman to convince her to test drive one  So we will see how she gets on later :TU: |
|
|
|
Post by philip42h on Jul 29, 2021 8:33:06 GMT
The 2.0 petrol CVT claims 40+ mpg. The whole reason for Toyota going with the CVT, over the torque converter, was to significantly improve fuel economy - which it does. I've never driven one, but those who have seem happy and suggest that it is very good.
You'll never detect a 'gear change' in a Toyota hybrid 'cos they don't happen. The CVT is just that - one continuous variable 'gear' that balances the inputs from the petrol and electric motors as appropriate.
The early Yaris hybrids did buzz a bit on the motorway - the later ones are really very relaxed.
|
|
|
|
Post by shcm on Jul 29, 2021 8:54:07 GMT
2016 RAV hybrid CVT doesn't whine/drone. The power-train is reasonably quiet, apart from when under hard accel. You might hear a very slight whine on decel due to the elec motor/generator regen, which I quite like.
While you've got the added complexity of the hybrid system, one thing to bear in mind is, due to the effective reduced compression ratio on the hybrid petrol lump (Atkinson cycle/modified Otto cycle, call it what you will) compared with the straight petrol, the thing is probably under less mechanical stress, which to my mind, is a good thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by philip42h on Jul 29, 2021 9:49:34 GMT
2016 RAV hybrid CVT doesn't whine/drone. The power-train is reasonably quiet, apart from when under hard accel. You might hear a very slight whine on decel due to the elec motor/generator regen, which I quite like. While you've got the added complexity of the hybrid system, one thing to bear in mind is, due to the effective reduced compression ratio on the hybrid petrol lump (Atkinson cycle/modified Otto cycle, call it what you will) compared with the straight petrol, the thing is probably under less mechanical stress, which to my mind, is a good thing. I'm sure that you are correct, but can you explain the "effective reduced compression ratio" point? (in relatively simple terms  ) - The 2.0-litre Valvematic petrol (3ZR-FAE) has a compression ratio of 10.0:1 and peak torque at 4,000/4,400 rpm
- The 2.5-litre VVT-i hybrid (2AAR-FXE) has a compression ratio of 12.5:1 and peak torque at 4,400 - 4,800 rpm - i.e. yours I think
- The 2.5-litre VVT-i hybrid (A25A-FXS) has a compression ratio of 14.0:1 and peak torque at 3,600 - 5,200 rpm - i.e. mine
The hybrids certainly 'feel' very relaxed and subjectively show no signs of strain, but the compression ratios do seem to be arithmetically higher ... ? |
|
|
|
Post by unclebob on Jul 29, 2021 10:06:25 GMT
It's the constant drone you get from the CVT that rules out those 'boxes for me. Don't know what it's like in a Rav but in a Yaris it's terrible. + they're not cheap!! You're at CX5 money and it's a nicer car/better drive. Mazda CX-3 is also a very competent option 👍🏻 |
|
|
|
Post by shcm on Jul 29, 2021 10:45:06 GMT
I'm sure that you are correct, but can you explain the "effective reduced compression ratio" point? (in relatively simple terms ) Fine, I'm wrong then. As I understood it an Atkinson engine has less "power density" (Strictly, I should probably say less like for like torque) compared with a same sized Otto. Effective compression stroke is shorter than the expansion on Atkinson (The inlet valves are left open for part of the compression cycle).
|
|
|
|
Post by firemac on Jul 29, 2021 10:51:45 GMT
As Clarki said…….have only driven a CVT Yaris, and what an annoying constant noise it made, with gear changes not smooth at all. Keich. Can’t comment on the Yaris hybrid but I’ve driven a 4.3 and an Auris hybrid both with CVT & they were both very good, the RAV particularly so - no over-revving nor droning. I had the Auris for nearly a week (courtesy car) and it returned over 60 mpg mostly m-way & dual carriageway. Our current 4.5 drives beautifully, no over-revving, no droning and very refined. Goes like the proverbial off a shovel when you floor it.😊 |
|
|
|
Post by philip42h on Jul 29, 2021 11:40:00 GMT
I'm sure that you are correct, but can you explain the "effective reduced compression ratio" point? (in relatively simple terms ) Fine, I'm wrong then. As I understood it an Atkinson engine has less "power density" compared with a same sized Otto.
I really don't think that you are wrong! Wikipedia, that font of all really reliable information, states: - which, to be honest, makes my head hurt, but I gather that the compression ratio is lower than the expansion ratio - though which is quoted by Toyota as the 'compression' ratio is anyone's guess. And, yes, my understanding is also that Atkinson swaps "power density" (whatever that is) for efficiency compared to straight Otto. And it does explain why our Atkinson cycle engines are normally aspirated - since there should be little energy left to drive the turbo! |
|
|
|
Post by jasehutch on Jul 29, 2021 12:10:37 GMT
As Clarki said…….have only driven a CVT Yaris, and what an annoying constant noise it made, with gear changes not smooth at all. Keich. I take it that wasn't the latest model Kev ? |
|
)