A lot of modern SUVs aren't like the SUVs of yesteryear. The Honda CR-V, Toyota RAV4, Ford Escape and the like are basically tall hatchbacks - they're not built on truck chassis like the GM Suburban or the Ford Expedition used to be.
If you're not driving aggressively, where you need minimal weight and a low CG, a modern SUV is generally more versatile than a car, and more stylish than a minivan, while still offering a ride and gas mileage that's on par with equivalent cars.
At over 1.6 tons a RAV4 is still hundreds of kg heavier than a sedan and has significantly more wind resistance and higher fuel consumption. It's not as bad as even bigger SUVs but it's hardly efficient. It's not difficult to find more efficient sedans with more legroom or equivalent trunk size.
Like a Camry hybrid from which the RAV4's platform is based on? 44city/47hwy/46combined.
The Camry only weights 10% less though. 20% reduction in fuel economy for far more cargo space, AWD, and higher ground clearance seems like a reasonable tradeoff to me.
You might have a different opinion if your fuel costs priced in the negative externalities of that 20% additional fuel consumption. It might not seem like much at $2.25/gal. What about at $4? I'm paying about $4.25 USD/gal now in Canada and that's still lower than many European countries. At $5/gal you might start asking whether you actually need AWD or how many times you've actually needed higher ground clearance driving on developed-country quality roads.
I'd like the higher ground clearance daily just to avoid scraping up my bumper on the dips on my commute home on the residential streets. Instead I just take the 30% longer/slower route around.
Even if gas were $6/gal, at the typical American 12k miles/year, that's still less than $300/year extra to run the CUV over the sedan. That's less than the cost of a rental for a weekend trip.
Please. The Camry has 5.7 inches of ground clearance. The RAV 4 has 6.1 inches of ground clearance. That's not getting you over any fallen logs any easier.
It's more the difference of a ~29° approach angle on the RAV4 vs the 15° on the Camry. Neither will get you over logs, but one does far better on steep driveways.
The last generation RAV4 (2005-2017) used Toyota's 'New MC' platform which is shared with the Prius and Corolla. The current generation RAV4 uses the 'TNGA-K' platform which is shared with the Camry and Avalon. Since we're comparing 2019 models, the comparison of the RAV4 with the Camry is appropriate.
I believe Toyota is moving all their FF vehicles onto the TNGA-K platform.
Thanks, I hadn't caught that change to the 2018+ models. That also explains why I'm not a fan of the current model as they drive differently to me... I'm keeping my old XA-30 ;)
Yes, modern 'crossover' SUVs are more efficient than the truck-based ones, but they're also not any more functional than a station wagon or minivan. Many of them actually have very little cargo capacity unless the 2nd row is folded down. Although some can be sold with true 4WD it's usually a significant cost add-on that most people don't buy. The change in styling has eaten up a good portion of the fuel efficiency gains from more efficient modern drivetrains for nothing except vanity.
>The change in styling has eaten up a good portion of the fuel efficiency gains from more efficient modern drivetrains for nothing except vanity.
TBH, I think a lot of people like the crossovers mostly because they feel like they're sitting higher off the ground. For whatever reason, that creates a feeling of safety.
If you're not driving aggressively, where you need minimal weight and a low CG, a modern SUV is generally more versatile than a car, and more stylish than a minivan, while still offering a ride and gas mileage that's on par with equivalent cars.