Is 2006 a good vintage for RAV4?

I'm thinking of buying a used RAV4. My in-laws have a 2005 RAV4 (2wd) and
they say the brakes are kind'a weak. That thinking is true for them, since
they live on a very steep hill that eats up the brakes. I know that my
'89 v6 Camry has weak breaks (ie change pads every other year with only
freeway driving). What about the 2006 RAV4? Our driving is 99.9% freeway
(40 mile per day commutes) and occasional local driving in suburbia. Thank
you.

EVERY OTHER YEAR? I'd give my right tire (so to speak) to be merely changing
pads every other year! I live in Pittsburgh and 15,000 to 20,000 miles for
front pads is as good as it gets! If your outlaws live in a hilly climate,
that's the way ANY vehicle is gonna be. Toyota is about as good as it gets.


"Dennis Leong" <spgdxl@berkeley.edu> wrote in message
news:duste8$8ps$1@agate.berkeley.edu...[color=blue]
> I'm thinking of buying a used RAV4. My in-laws have a 2005 RAV4 (2wd) and
> they say the brakes are kind'a weak. That thinking is true for them, since
> they live on a very steep hill that eats up the brakes. I know that my
> '89 v6 Camry has weak breaks (ie change pads every other year with only
> freeway driving). What about the 2006 RAV4? Our driving is 99.9% freeway
> (40 mile per day commutes) and occasional local driving in suburbia.
> Thank you.
>[/color]

Dennis Leong wrote:[color=blue]
> I'm thinking of buying a used RAV4.[/color]

We have an 04 AWD AT RAV4. No problem with brakes.
The overall redesign year was 2002, I think. Then in 04
the HP was increased 10%. For lots of hill driving,
that's important. For mostly/all flatland driving it's
not that important. We really like driving this car.

The only down side is the mileage. For a car of its size
(so small) it's not great. Last c.y. our AWD averaged 20.5.
FWD will be better. Your 40 mile R.T. commute is not far
by B.A. standards, so don't know how important that is to you.
[color=blue]
> What about the 2006 RAV4?[/color]

I looked at one at a dealer the other day. It's as big as
our 04 Highlander. That's not necessarily a bad thing,
it depends on your needs. We always drive the RAV4 when we
go into Berkeley/Oakland because we can park it almost anywhere.

It puzzles us that the larger/heavier 06 6 cyl
has better EPA estimated mileage than our 04 4 cyl.
What's up with that?

"ll" <lkslittle@REMOVEcomcastTHIS.net> wrote in message
news:44131A1F.CB2CB1EC@REMOVEcomcastTHIS.net...[color=blue]
> Dennis Leong wrote:[color=green]
>> I'm thinking of buying a used RAV4.[/color]
>
> We have an 04 AWD AT RAV4. No problem with brakes.
> The overall redesign year was 2002, I think. Then in 04
> the HP was increased 10%. For lots of hill driving,
> that's important. For mostly/all flatland driving it's
> not that important. We really like driving this car.
>
> The only down side is the mileage. For a car of its size
> (so small) it's not great. Last c.y. our AWD averaged 20.5.
> FWD will be better. Your 40 mile R.T. commute is not far
> by B.A. standards, so don't know how important that is to you.
>[color=green]
>> What about the 2006 RAV4?[/color]
>
> I looked at one at a dealer the other day. It's as big as
> our 04 Highlander. That's not necessarily a bad thing,
> it depends on your needs. We always drive the RAV4 when we
> go into Berkeley/Oakland because we can park it almost anywhere.
>
> It puzzles us that the larger/heavier 06 6 cyl
> has better EPA estimated mileage than our 04 4 cyl.
> What's up with that?[/color]

If the newer model has a 5 speed automatic transmission and you have a
4-speed transmission, that would account for some of the difference. Also,
the larger engine may not have to work as hard during the EPA test.
--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)