Toyota RAV4 1.8 2WD info.

Hi all, anybody got the in and outs on these wee beasts !. fuel economy!. cambelts/chains what ever they have ! Thanks

2 litre has cambelt, but not sure about the 1.8 !

Ok, the one I got my eye on down the road is a year 2000 and auto if that helps anyone to comment.

If it's the later shape, it will be a chain drive. It's basically a Corolla drivetrain. Fuel economy, roughly 10L/100km. As for ins and outs, the RAV 4 fails to deliver for the money you pay for it.

Auction number!

It not on TM this one, private sale

This one is similar 476474656 and a later one 472552620.
Cheers mugenb20b

OK, definitely chain driven motor, good car, but like I said, RAV 4 is very pricey. Not a lot of car for the money (in my opinion).

its a sh*tter, dont bother

Please explain your reasons !

+ 1 they are an east west fwd in a supposed to be awd or land type vehicle dangerous & good for nothing except lookn at.

Yeah if it's a 2WD model what the hell is it meant to be good for!

Can it get through a wet paddock without getting stuck! Nope
Good fuel economy! Nope
Some power for overtaking! Nope
Lots of room inside! Nope
Small size and easier to park than a family sedan! Nope

Yes it's taller and makes it a bit easier to see over cars at intersections but that's not worth it for all the other trade offs you'll encounter.

A seriously useless vehicle. This is not a dig at the RAV-4 specifically but all soft-roaders of that era. Don't bother.

There seems to all negatives on the RAV 2WD .mmmmmm

Ok opyou are hearing opinions from "car guys" I must say it does look like these are mostly based on experience of the older 2.0l awd or 1800 2wd.
The older 9(94-99) rav 4 wasa 2.0l caldina AWDmechanically.
But loud in the cabin because of tyre noise ,not a lot bigger cabin than a conventional cars -smaller than a wagon in most cases and they had truely terrible fuel economy for a 2.0l.As a soft offroader they were ok.but far from brilliant.A lot of customers that bought for the seat height complained aboutthe seat shaping. The 1800cc version was a tiny bit more economical but not much.
BUT-the toyota engineers did listen.
The 2000 and newertwo wheel drive model is improved a lot. But is also a heap worse from .
The running gear it sits on is the toyota corolla/allex/feilder/wish etc etc so very reliable and fuel efficcient.
The cabin is quieter and a bit wider.
But its still no where near as economical as a conventional car (theres plenty out there with high seats),Its no better offroad than a normal vehicle with the exception of having better ground clearance.As a road car they don't handle very well. And the load space is comparitively tiny.
My view is they were never a BAD car but just that for every coinceivable purpose theres a heck of a lot better available

Ok opyou are hearing opinions from "car guys" I must say it does look like these are mostly based on experience of the older 2.0l awd or 1800 2wd.
The older 9(94-99) rav 4 wasa 2.0l caldina AWDmechanically.
But loud in the cabin because of tyre noise ,not a lot bigger cabin than a conventional cars -smaller than a wagon in most cases and they had truely terrible fuel economy for a 2.0l.As a soft offroader they were ok.but far from brilliant.A lot of customers that bought for the seat height complained aboutthe seat shaping. The 1800cc version was a tiny bit more economical but not much.
BUT-the toyota engineers did listen.
The 2000 and newertwo wheel drive model is improved a lot. But is also a heap worse from .
The running gear it sits on is the toyota corolla/allex/feilder/wish etc etc so very reliable and fuel efficcient.
The cabin is quieter and a bit wider.
But its still no where near as economical as a conventional car (theres plenty out there with high seats),Its no better offroad than a normal vehicle with the exception of having better ground clearance.As a road car they don't handle very well. And the load space is comparitively tiny.
My view is they were never a BAD car but just that for every coinceivable purpose theres a heck of a lot better available.
BUT --why do you want a rav!I promise I wont mock you for a moment.
It may very be that if its not purely asthetics that we can suggest better options for you

Hey thanks for that kas., not wanting it for off road, hence 2 WD model questioning. mainly looking for something with easier access into the car with higher road clearance to the average car.

Nothing wrong with that. But, RAV 4 is the most expensive car in the world that will suit your needs.

You be better off with an Xbox BB Toyota roomy economical ease of entry and not stupidly designed.

I own one, FWD 1800cc 2 door. I needed a higher seating position and visibility for my work, I inspect roads for a job.
Economy is as mugenb20b said, 10L/100km. Pretty good car for around town and ok on open road. I've taken the rear seats out and its a bit noisy on chipseal roads.
Reliability is excellent, driven 70,000 in it (odo on 113,000) and no issues at all.
Styling is pretty naff, but from my point of view as a work car its been great. I'll probably replace it with an identical one.

If it was just point 1 Ive got a stack of suggestions for ya. Point 2 though I need to clarify--ie Just how much Ground clearance do you need! and why!

Ok, sturmie is very kindly making these enquiries for me.I currently own an older Suzuki Escudo and want to update but have LOVED the space in the back (seats are permanently folded up) and the fact that I don't have to struggle in and out as has been my experience with previous vehicles I have owned.Rav seemed logical next step, particularly one without 4WD as I never use it.But not loving the feedback here!Any suggestions as to what I should be looking at!Want something short (easy to park) for round town, 2-door is fine as long as it has room in the back for a couple of bags of compost, assorted plants and my golf clubs, and comfortable on the open road as I do the odd day-trip to nearby centres at the weekends.Mission impossible!

r palmer--Then Ground clearance isn't an issue at all!
On that basis I can suggest looking at a bunch of vehicles that will fill your needs nicely

My first suggestion for you is a Toyota Funcargo 1500cc
My reasoning being-
They are just HUGE inside with the seats folded.
They have a tried and true engine/drivetrain
They are very economical
The Drivers and front passenger door is also very big meaning no ducking to get in
The seats aren't as high as the escudo but much higher than 1990's cars.-Everybody that has got into one has said they are extremely easy to get into
Second suggestion would be a 2002-2006 Mazda Demio
Not as big inside and lower doors but roomy enough in the back

Third would be a Toyota Racus 1500cc
This one is very similar to a Funcargo but for Taller folks a bit tight behind the steering wheel

Thanks for all this really valuable advice - I'm off searching!And thanks sturmie for getting this conversation started for me - blokes know stuff about cars, eh!!

Toyota RAV4 1.8 2WD info.

Related Topics