Toyota RAV4 Accident Tests

gracejoangracejoan Member Posts: 11
edited April 2014 in Toyota
I was shocked when a friend with a 2005 RAV was in a rather minor accident..front and rear.. but,with over $3000 in repairs. His insurance was either State Farm or Allstate..I am pretty sure it was State Farm..told him to get rid of the RAV as they were poorly made and not safe to drive!!

I have my 4th a Limited it!

I would certainly like to hear what those of you who are "more in the know" have to say about this.



  • gracejoangracejoan Member Posts: 11
    I have just found out that it ws NOT the insurance agent, but was the collision shop manager who made that statement.

    Quite a statement to make.

    Anxious for input..

  • tidestertidester Member Posts: 10,059
    If you're looking for feedback from other RAV4 owners you're more likely to get it in the main Toyota RAV4 discussion.

    tidester, host
  • philipleephiliplee Member Posts: 3
    RAV has a crumple zone build-in in the front and rear. I have a 2004 RAV4 base Auto got totaled in a 25 to 30 mile per hour front collision. The design is aimed to allow the front end to take the most damage while preventing the impact to intrude to the cabin. The airbag did not even deploy in this case. The driver is O.K.. However the two main frame posts (where the bumper attached to) in front were bent. The dealer shop estimated at $14000 for repair (while book value is at $17000 excluding TTL). That is the major reason my insurance offered me a total compensation.
  • carnivorecarnivore Member Posts: 19
    Would you rather have your fender crumple or your head go through the windshield? The Rav4 is well made, it did exactly what it was supposed to do, it crumpled, absorbing the impact. Of course that means it's expensive to repair, but then the whole body shop industry is a racket anyway with the rates they charge insurance companies.

    Here's the US government safety rating:

    And the IIHS (Insurance Industry) safety rating:
  • leeharvey418leeharvey418 Member Posts: 38
    Interesting... I'd be curious to see how many vehicles could take a frontal impact at 25-30 mph and not experience high enough passenger cell acceleration to deploy the airbags.

    Most people don't realize that an impact at that speed is enough to total 95% or better of vehicles on the road today. No, I'm not just talking about new vehicles either. Body-on-frame trucks (and the dinosaur cars that are out there) might look okay on the outside, but the term 'frame damage' exists for a reason, along with what it does to the value of a vehicle once that label has been applied.
  • sidious6688sidious6688 Member Posts: 80
    More and more cars today are designed to absorb energy and spares their passengers. This is done but slowing the deceleration of the passengers. To accomplish this, the car must crumple in stages so then when the fron end of the impact occurs and is stopped instantly, the rest of the car follows suit. The reason you dont feel an impact if you land on a tramboline is that you are slowed over a distant instead of a hard surface. The heavy damage to the vehicle is the pruce paid for the greater survivability of the occupents. Your odds of surviving a crash today are vastly superior to years ago. This is one of the key reasons. If you remember the Knight Industries Two thousand (KITT) from Knight Rider, such an indestructible car might be imjmune to annoying scratches, but would condemn you death in crash, not save you.
  • dtown40dtown40 Member Posts: 18
    Am I the crazy one here? If my Rav 4 was totaled in a low speed accident, and I got out and walked away, I think that whatever the cost would be, would be a bargain if it saved my life. Just my opinion.
  • mawwmaww Member Posts: 1
    I agree with dtown40 - I was in an accident with my '97 RAV4 just a few weeks ago. The other driver T-boned me (hit my passenger side which was empty thankfully); he was going about 40 mph.

    I walked away with very sore muscles but only a couple of scratches. I'm thankful every day that my RAV4 was built to protect me.

    My car was a total loss but I'm overjoyed that I was safe.

    I'm seriously considering buying another RAV4 based on that accident and 5.5 years of problem-free ownership. She was a fantastic car and will be missed! :)
  • 1rav4gal1rav4gal Member Posts: 2
    I purchased my RAV4 in May, 2008 and it has about 5200 miles. I had the 5000 mile service done on 2/25/09. About four days after this service, I noticed my RAV4 had eight small dents on it. All of the dents were on the body panels were in an area from the bottom of the windows down about 10". There were three dents on the left front panel by the hood, three dents on the right rear quarter panel and two dents on the right rear passenger door. My local Toyota dealer had the dents removed and covered all costs. They did that on 3/6/09. On 3/12/09, I had the car hand washed and now have two dents on the right rear quarter panel again. Is it me or is this car made of tin foil? The dealer said that there was no bulletin from Toyota identifying any problem like this. Has any other owner experienced anything like this?
This discussion has been closed.