Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
I agree with the previous post that the Highlander is better looking than the Pilot. Although the Highlander looks narrow, it is very roomy on the inside.
Most of it is in the city. i had never seriously measured it on a highway. Next time i will check it out. So, looks like 21 mpg in city is pretty decent for a 4-cyl.
Thanks in advance
I have a 6 year-old in a booster and a 3 year-old who just changed to a booster.
Our family car is a Land Cruiser and my car is a Highlander LTD. In 2004, I sold my previous sedan (Accord V6) for the HL and went through this same decision.
My thoughts - If you plan to use the 3rd-row seat a lot (few times a week or more), the Pilot is probably your better choice. However, if it is only to be used a few times a month or less (not on overly long distances), the HL is a great choice.
I've had both car seats in the back ~10 times in 20 months - no problems, no complaints (my boys are 49" & 40"). However, depending upon the height of your children and how they grow during the time that you own this vehicle, the back is just not great for an often used seating area. Furthermore, when this area is being used for seating, the cargo area is skimpy (don't plan on taking much with you - hard to fit a stroller for the infant).
On the plus side - the HL has been rock solid. I just turned over 40K and have only performed routine oil changes and replaced the crappy tires (GY Integrity). Gas mileage has been pretty good (~21mpg) in mixed driving. Much better than what I have read about the Pilot's mpg.
That's my $0.02.
Scott
I don't think so. Assuming a normal Sept intro for the 2007 models, there's no way they build 5 months ahead. Typically the last current model year build would be sometime in June and they would start building the next model year in July.
We know from the 2007 Camry discussion that they were still building a mix 2006 and 2007 models 2 weeks ago and the 2007 shows up in showrooms in 2 weeks.
Thanks!
2) Not sure about this. Sounds like maybe there are a couple of wires like a rear window defroster but I don't see them.
Asked the dealer during delivery and he mumbled something about changing gear selection... Perhaps it does not allow you to start in first gear?? :confuse:
Thanks
Jeff
You are correct that the ECT/Snow button allows only 2nd gear starts, in effect it doesn't allow the transmission to downshift into 1st gear.
Enjoy your HL. We still love our '02 LTD.
GregB
If does not affect the throttle as stated, nor does it affect traction control on the FWD (non-4wd) models. These are controlled separately.
Most FWD models with traction control have a separate switch to modify the lockup (braking action) parameters. In other words make it seem like the 2 front tires are driving together more. With both active (SnowMode & Tracontrol), it definitely feels like the front differential is locked, but in reality there is no locking of that differential.
Prior to DBW the solution was to change the shift pattern and also start out from a stop in second gear.
2006 Toyota Highlander (non-hybrid)
Steve, Host
Then post a few rumors and a couple of off-the-wall Photoshopped pics and watch the thread grow.
Steve, Host
1. In sharp contrast to kdhspyder's prediction it will be introduced in 2007 and my prediction it will be introduced in 2008, it was actually introduced in 2006 but no one noticed because everyone was too busy posting and nobody actually visited a dealership.
2. Contrary to popular expectation that it will grow in size to differentiate itself from the new, larger RAV4, the HL will actually shrink in size, effectively switching places with the RAV4, causing everyone who bought a RAV4 because they wanted a small SUV to buy a new HL, and vice versa.
3. They'll fix the engine hesitation, steering rubbing, warped rotor, and the plethora of interior rattle problems, and most importantly they'll finally get rid of those louvered plugs inset in the front bumpers of the non-limited models.
The new RX350 does not have the DFI engine but the AWD model has a VC (again) and rumor is that it will get a third row come September.
Speaking of which, I've owned a Toyota pickup since it was purchased new in 1983, and am finally getting rid of it. No, it's still running fine (the thing just never dies). It's just that after a while you want something new. Merely a comment on Toyota reliability, especially their older generation trucks -- it was extremely reliable over the years. There were a few repairs, but they were far and few between (water pump, oil seal leak, starter motor (due to oil leak damage), alternator (due to oil leak damage), master brake cylinder, horn switch, cruise control switch, radio switch, and I think that's about it (except for things like brake pads, batteries, and repairs due to traffic accidents)). Only had it tuned up maybe 2 or 3 times. People have occasionally asked me if I want to sell it, so they're still popular. Just felt compelled to say something about it before I part with it; it has served me very well.
On the flip side, just took possession of a brand new factory order '06 Ford Ranger a few weeks ago. Probably would have got a Toyota if they were still available in a longbed, but only the Ranger is now. Will see how the Ranger holds up reliability-wise. (Actually compared reliability data for the Ford Ranger and Toyota Tacoma pickups on edmunds.com' Problems and Solutions discussions and in Consumer Reports. While the Ranger does have more problems, it isn't like it's a factor of 10 different; my rough guestimate is maybe 1.4 times the repairs for the Ranger vs. the Tacoma, so am budgeting just a little bit more for repairs.) That Ranger feels way different than my old pickup -- the Ranger is heavier and handles like a true down-to-earth truck, as contrasted to the old pickup's nimble, car-like feel.
(I know that many of you probably dis-agree with me on this. But I would prefer not to argue about this matter)
Now that I think about it.. because of the safety issues involved in seats I would imagine that they are bolted down with many highly-torqued bolts therefore very hard to remove them for storage.
Was driving at night. Drizzling. I signaled to make a lane change to the right and started the lane change. Frantic honking. There was a car directly to the right of me. Nearly wiped him out.
I went to a parking lot and experimented by pulling up next to parked small cars. A low dark car is simply not visible when it is in the lane to your right and the headlights are ahead of the right-hand mirror on the SUV.
* Unless the car has a very shiny, visible "greenhouse" there is just nothing to see looking to the right from the driver's seat through the high tinted side windows of the Highlander.
* The car's headlights are ahead of Highlander's side mirror, so no lights are showing in the mirror.
* The only clue that there is a car there is headlights illuminating the road.
Made the same experiment in parking lot with my conventional car -- much less of a hazard because I can see reflections on the side of the neighboring car out the un-tinted side windows of my car.
How do you folks avoid that problem?
Thanks!
Am I missing something here?
At nighttime, I can see a low car car that is light-colored (because of the light roof), but not a gray or black one that is so low that the body isn't in line of sight -- due to the high side windows of the Highlander. Only the roof and "greenhouse" are visible.
If the car in the next lane is positioned so that their headlights are ahead of the Highlander's right hand mirror (which had raindrops on it), there was simply nothing to see except for their headlights on the road ahead.
Now that I think of it, my old car has sidelights that cast a little light on anything in the adjoining lanes.
Aha! My side mirror needs to be cocked down so that it might pick up shiny chrome or shiny rear wheels and wheelcovers of the adjoining dark car in the dark.
When I Googled this, I found lots of comments by bicyclists and motorcyclists warning each other about never riding next to an SUV. I can see why.
I think that another part of the answer is to accelerate when intending to change lanes so that your are sure that the lane next to you is clear. In other words, always assume that there is a Mini or a bicycle next to you that you can't see. And therefore surge ahead so that you are next to part of the lane that you know is empty.
I like the Highlander, but this was a very, very upsetting experience. Thanks for any help you can give.