2008 Toyota Rav4 CV6 review
May 25, 2008 by Paul Maric
2008 Toyota Rav4 CV6 Road Test
Model tested: Toyota Rav4 CV6
Recommended Retail Price: $39,990.
Options fitted: None Fitted.
Rear leg room, universal styling.
Understeer, driveability, torque steer, steering feel, power delivery, sound system.
CarAdvice rating: 
(2.00)
– Review by Paul Maric, photographs by Toyota.
Soon after its release, I drove the Toyota Rav4. At the time of its introduction to the market, it was only available as a 4-cylinder. I recall being disappointed with the lack of power from the engine, which struggled at times to haul the car’s mass. Toyota has addressed these concerns and stuck the same engine as the Aurion underneath the Rav4’s bonnet. Case closed, Paul is now happy. Err…not quite.
I took the new V6 Rav4 for a spin and it was interesting to say the least. Packing some 201kW and 333Nm of torque, this V6 motor is certainly no lightweight. Weighing in at 1655kg, the Rav4 is quite a light ‘SUV’ in relative terms. The 200mm ground clearance increases the centre of gravity and the semi-off-road capable tyres reduce grip levels. This set of factors makes for quite a challenging combination.
My first encounter was a truck with loose cargo travelling under the speed limit and partially in my lane. I had to pass it, so I sank the boot in and received the shock of my life as the car torque steered in several different directions. The V6 engine sends power through the front wheels and only redirects it to the rear wheels if it detects slippage.
If I thought that was bad, the following day it started raining. Pulling away from an intersection in peak-hour traffic required a decent prod of the throttle to hurry things along. Stabbing the loud pedal produced a flurry of wheel spin (typical of an overpowered front-wheel-drive vehicle). No problems I thought, in a matter of moments power will be sent to the rear and we will have more traction with which to work.
Well, I can’t say I was wrong, power was sent to the rear but this turned a slight bit of understeer into obvious oversteer and I had to correct the rear to bring it back into line. If I thought this car was bad in the dry, it was potentially dangerous in the wet.
The surge of urgency delivered by the engine hits all at once and is extremely sharp. To the regular driver, this can come as a total shock in certain situations. It’s way too much power to be sending through such a vehicle and in my opinion, it should have been down-tuned to reduce the spasmodic delivery of power, perhaps with more concentration on producing torque.
Interior room is impressive, as are the ergonomics of the seats. They fold down quite easily and provide easy entry/exit for children and adults. The sound system is quite average and the head-unit looks poorly integrated, unfortunately this is a trait shared with the Corolla and Kluger.
The quality of plastics is good, but some feel a bit cheap (like the dash surrounds and door handle surrounds). Interior room is great for a small family and the styling is good enough to keep the masses pleased. Fuel economy on test was reminiscent of a V6 – around 11-litres/100km.
Priced from $39,990 for the base model CV6 (as tested), prices move onto $43,990 for the SX6 and max out at $49,990 for the ZR6. The Mitsubishi Outlander and Honda CR-V offer a better package. If you are desperate for a V6 though, Mitsubishi’s offering is far more linear and smooth and is capable on mild off-road tracks. The Outlander’s engine is well behaved and can be controlled by steering wheel paddle shifters – a quaint touch.
As for the Rav4. If driven sedately it’s a car you could live with. But if the off chance arises where full power is required, you would need to be paying full attention.
Click here to read Tony’s review of the 2008 Toyota Rav4.
CarAdvice overall rating:
How does it drive:
How does it look: 
How does it go:
2008 Toyota Rav4 CV6 Specifications
Engine: 3.5-litre
Power: 201kW
Torque: 333Nm
Top speed: N/A
Safety: Electronic stability control- front air bags – side airbags – curtain airbags – front seatbelt pre-tensioners and load limiters.
0-100km/h: N/A
EuroNCAP rating: N/A
Turning circle: 10.6m
Fuel tank: N/A
Fuel consumption : 10.5 litres/100km (claimed)
Fuel type: 91RON unleaded
Print it: 
How lame is it to designate a model as a “widebody”.
Enough of this Toyota drivel Boston Legal is coming up!
“Here’s my bet … in a few years, the Commodore and Falocn will go FWD because of mounting pressures to reduce costs and the fact that sales of the Commodore and Falcon are at thier lowest in many decades won’t be helping thier cause.”
Toyota Supporter or Dingo! I could not see holden or ford for the commodore of falcon go to FWD there got RWD not like youre silly Aurion which is FWD, if they did go to FWD they’d lose sales and be going backwards!
Come on guys back me up! Because you know Dingo is full of crap! Don’t You?
Though Dingo id have to agree it was stupid for ford to get rid of the fairlane and the fairmont!
“Toyota is beating your beloved Ford’s and Chevy’s at thier own game on thier own soil – NASCAR … OOOCH !!”
Dingo, I (and im sure other people too) dont CARE IF TOYOTAS THE BEST AT NASCAR OR THE WORST!!!!!!!!!! It’s just a stupid amercican racing sport i dont CARE! Just like Gridion is CRAP TOO!
“Oh yeah – and for the critics of the RAV4, unlike that Daewoo thing that Holden sells called a Craptiva – the Toyota finished it’s test unlike the Holden counterpart that had to be carted away by truck.”
Dingo is that ^ true or is that JUST PLAIN CRAP!?!? That the captiva got carted away? Because i cant trust you!
in 40 years no torota will be worth over 100,000 buck no unlike the Falcon gt holden Torana or even Valiant Chagers i mean you can pick up hotted up late 70 Celica for 6,000 while escort fetch up to 20,000 because these day Toyota have no colt car there the most boring cars on the planet
Dingo, In youre opinion what car company do you like overall Ford or Holden?
So you like ford better than holden?
^Yep that must be right!
Duck, don’t ask, don’t agree and don’t engage.
GhisGT – you would know a good review right? How many new cars have you driven in the last 24 months? You can count them on one hand right?
We do this for a living! The fact that my colleague Paul Maric and I, disagree on whether we like a vehicle or not, is precisely why we continue to grow in leaps and bounds. It’s called editorial independence and we are proud of that. It isn’t the first time and it won’t be the last time, colleagues from Car Advice disagree on their overall opinion on a particular vehicle!
Good to see you’re around Anthony. Maybe you could tidy up some of the aggression on here if you’re at the mothership’s helm, or have a go in the morning.
Paul Maric might be right or wrong i don’t know because i haven’t had the pleasure of testing this vehicle BUT he has the right to express his honest opinion without being called a liar or imply that he is corrupt because we don’t know him well enough to accuse him of anything more than getting a review right or wrong…..so stop putting pressure on people who have the balls to disagree with the majority!!
As the Editor of this website and someone who over more than 30 years has driven just about everything from a Fiat 500 to the Lemans winning Bentley racecar, I can say that Paul Maric consulted me about his review before it was published. Not only did I approve the publication of the review, I spent two days driving the car and in principle endorsed his impressions of the vehicle.
Equally that doesn’t detract from Anthony Crawford’s differing impressions.
That’s what they do – review cars and that can mean entirely different opinions, take from both reviews what you can and form your own opinions but don’t accuse either of them of lies, or improper dealing, just accept their differing opinions and move on!
Car advice.. Maybe a few reviews from other brands might stop all of the above. It’s like a broken record. I agree totally and wholeheartedly with your review on how the CV6 drives. The CV6 is a superfluous vehicle on our market (especially against the Kluger) and dealers are practically giving them away to move old stock (the car is only 8 months old!). Take it as gospel from somebody who sells them for a living and drives one every day as a demonstrator.
TP is a paid Toyota blogger, or he hasn’t driven a CV6.
Having just driven a CV6 Rav it’s the only explanation.
The review is spot on in every respect except one, it fails to mention the CV6’s apalling brakes.
A truly dangerous car.