Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

2006 Toyota RAV4

18687888991

Comments

  • leeharvey418leeharvey418 Member Posts: 38
    There's "can we make it fit?" and there's "should we design it so that it will fit?". Toyota obviously had the chance to design in hybrid compatibility to the third generation RAV4 from the beginning, but they chose not to.

    I'll grant you that "hybrid" probably wasn't high on the priority list of more than a couple of product planners when the original HL was designed, but if they hadn't intended any adaptability in the engine bay, then why was it originally designed with enough space for the eventual V6 and hybrid powertrains?

    Regardless, as I understand it, the packaging issue that precludes a RAV4 hybrid is actually battery space, not the engine bay.
  • mtwebstermtwebster Member Posts: 7
    I haven't been to this forum in a number of months, and short of paging through a mountain of posts, does anyone know if there has been anything further done regarding the acceleration lag that these vehicles are prone to (at least mine still is) - when I voiced my original concern to my dealer, I was told this 'choking' was intentional to prevent wear on the drivetrain before the oils and lubricants were up to full operating temperatures.

    I'm wondering if this is still the 'official' word on this issue?

    Thanks
  • mark19mark19 Member Posts: 123
    A friend of mine has that acceleration lag. They found a TSB (service bulletin) for the transmission, and yes it fixed this lag. Even though the TSB was for the transmission if you read the bulletin it went on to describe the engine and emissions system. Nice way of Toyota to hide that they were really masking the emissions of the 4 cyl engine through the engine computer slowing the rate of fuel to the engine, and the lag! Don't let the tsb title fool you, it'll say transmission but it's really for the engine computer as well. Also my friend's fuel economy increased about 3-4mpg as well. They do have the 4cyl engine (rav4 fwd, 2006) I will have to search for the tsb number or ask them if they still have a copy of it if you need a number. A dealer should be able to find this for you as well, but sounds like your dealer is just making up excuses which is a joke! Might want to find yourself a dealer who doesn't lie to you.

    Hope that helps. It does solve the acceleration lag, so it's a computer software issue.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I wonder if it's a bypass in the vacuum lines, like you can do with the V6s in the Sienna (both 3.3l and 3.5l). I'm sure the mod would work on a V6 RAV4, too.

    Details here:

    http://www.angelfire.com/ky3/gabby/intake_mod.htm

    Disclaimer: my 3.5l V6 Sienna wasn't hesitating, but I did this anyway, and my mileage has improved.
  • cbmortoncbmorton Member Posts: 252
    Any hint on how this mod can be done on the 2GR-FE, the underhood configuration being somewhat different than as shown in the pictures at that site? I'm loath to start disconnecting vacuum hoses without being sure I'm doing it to the right ones. I'm not having issues with my engine either but I'm always interested in better mileage.
  • mark19mark19 Member Posts: 123
    didn't you read my message? i didn't mention anything about disconnecting vacuum lines, and there is only one anyway it's for the emissions systems. So I don't see how disconnecting anything for the emissions system is going to help your fuel economy. Most likely it'll hurt your engine in the long term.

    the update I was mentioning was not for the v-6 but for the 4cyl. And yes updating the software inside the computer (ecu, brain) will definitely help fuel economy.
  • cbmortoncbmorton Member Posts: 252
    Thanks - once I got the service manual out it's obvious where the vacuum hoses go. However, the manual makes the two-stage intake sound desirable, and indicates that the control valve in the intake manifold is open most of the time on the 2GR-FE anyway - so that may be different than the way the 3.3 V6 worked:

    The ACIS is realized by using a bulkhead to divide the intake manifold into 2 stages, with an intake air control valve in the bulkhead being opened and closed to vary the effective length of the intake manifold in accordance with the engine speed and throttle valve opening angle. This increases the power output in all ranges from low to high speed.
    • When the intake control valve closes:
    While the engine is running at medium speed under high load, the ECM controls the actuator to close the control valve. As a result, the effective length of the intake manifold is lengthened and the intake efficiency, in the medium speed range, is improved due to the dynamic effect of the intake air, thereby increasing power output.
    • When the intake control valve opens:
    Under any condition except when the engine is running at medium speed under high load, the ECM controls the actuator to open the control valve. When the control valve is open, the effective length of the intake air chamber is shortened and peak intake efficiency is shifted to the low to high engine speed range, thus providing greater output at low to high engine speeds.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    The theory is that it actually takes a second or two for that 2nd path to open when you floor the throttle, and this is the reason for the hesitation some people report.

    I dunno, my V6 was quick before, quick now, no hesitation before or after. My mileage did improve but it was breaking in and that might have happened anyway.

    For people reporting hesitation, though, it's something worth considering, IMO, if their engine has a similar intake.
  • 01taurussel01taurussel Member Posts: 43
    Hi Folks,
    taking a look at CR-V and RAV4. I am concerned about the engine revving and not moving the car forward. My folks 03 Explorer is the SLOWEST transmission to shift - its delay is very pronounced. I dont think its unsafe since the car is slow even when you floor it.
    Is this on all 4-cyl models? Just some? What is the reasons for the hesisation? I see this happens with Camry's and Solaras as well.
    I just want a safe, reliable auto for my fiance. IF the tranny is like the explorer's - just lazy, I don't care I am used to Fords :)
  • raviola4raviola4 Member Posts: 52
    I assume Toyota has the problem fixed now, but can't confirm. Mine is an early model 4 cyl. 06 Rav. There is a TSB out there that covers this issue which i've previously reported as a serious flaw. Since having it done a few months ago, car has run flawlessly, good pick up, no hesitation and mileage improved to boot. Believe only with 4 cyl. and again, i'd think they fixed the problem. Knowing this, test drive a 4 cyl. I'm sure the 6 will rocket you forward, but mine does well, consistently 23-24 around local and 26-28 (even 30 on one trip)highway.
  • 01taurussel01taurussel Member Posts: 43
    Does the 07 have this TSB or is it just with the 06? Im gonna test drive one soon. I'd like the V6, but I bet its thirsty!
  • cbmortoncbmorton Member Posts: 252
    The TSB also affects the early part of the 2007 model year. Any 2007s still on lots shouldn't be affected.

    I have the V6 - it's only slightly thirstier than the four-cylinder. I get a consistent 21-22 mpg around town and 27-28 on the highway, even 29-30 a couple of times.
  • 01taurussel01taurussel Member Posts: 43
    Thats not bad for gas mileage at all.......I wonder why Edmunds got like 16-17mpg ? Lead foot?
  • cbmortoncbmorton Member Posts: 252
    Sure, just like in any other car it depends on how hard you push it and what kind of driving you do. Edmunds' long-term test of a RAV4 V6 included some pretty good mpg figures when they were using the car in more of a day-to-day vs. a road test mode.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    They are lead foots. I have the same engine in my Sienna, and I'm averaging 25mpg or so, mostly suburbs/highway. My low is 23mpg and my high is 30.6mpg on a trip.

    If you want the V6, get the V6. Consumer Reports noted only a 1 mpg difference between the V6 and the 4 banger RAV4.
  • ogrerugbyogrerugby Member Posts: 2
    raviola4, do you have the details on that TSB? I have an 06 Rav4 4 cyl with the same lag issue and will be brining it in for service shortly. I'd love to have that info available to show them.
  • 01taurussel01taurussel Member Posts: 43
    Does the AWD model lower gas mileage much?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I've seen the I-4 compared to the V6, but not AWD vs. FWD.

    Toyota uses a part-time system, so there shouldn't be too much extra drag in the drivetrain. You just have to carry a little extra weight around. Figure you lose 1 or 2 mpg, tops.
  • 01taurussel01taurussel Member Posts: 43
    How would you say these compare to CR-V's? Honda dealerships will NOT deal CR-V's! I am thinking about RAV4 or CR-V
  • jimdrewjimdrew Member Posts: 84
    If you want a 4 cyl than get the CRV if you want a V6 get the RAV4. I have the V6 RAV 2006 and get great mileage and have the great V6 engine that is one of the 10 best in the world...

    Jimmy Drew
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    They should be very similar.

    Honestly, both are relatively efficient, I would look for other criteria to make your choice.
  • verdi942verdi942 Member Posts: 304
    I just got my '07 4-cyl AWD and was wondering how many rpm @ 60mph in top gear? Does anyone know where such info can be found? Thanks.
  • andrelaplumeandrelaplume Member Posts: 934
    Well, I was unaware of this issue and we have had a 4cylinder 2006 RAV for over a year now!

    While the RAV has many pleasing features, Toyota qaulity is slipping though. I noticed it in the rattles dept on my 02 camry and here's a few tidbits on our 06 RAV.

    We have had our RAV over a year and have 16K miles. A few days ago my wife gets into the car, which was parked at her workplace with the windows up all day; outside temp was maybe 85 degrees. She gets in. She immediately notices that the TWO pillar trim pieces running on each side from up by the sun visors down to the dash (the ones that says: SRS airbags) have poped open exposing what I believe to be two airbag!!!

    I ran down to Toyota and the service manager was aghast and said he'd never seen both these peices pop off like this before...ie at the same time. (He had seen one pop off off though, which did not make me feel any better)

    He asked if we'd had any work done because it looked like the clips were worn off, I said not much except:

    1) New radio recently installed to fix screen scrambling type issue
    2) TSB for Power Steering module recently installed after light came one.
    3) Both driver and passenger seat belts / pillar hardware replaced 9 months ago due to continual vibration / rattle noise.
    4) water leak TSB performed after water got in at footwell.

    I also mentioned that the seat belt rattle was still present in the door pillar where the seat belt adjuster is. He rode the RAV and agreed it was annoying as hell. He is ordering new airbag trim and parts to again attempt to quiet the door pillar rattle. Best of luck to him on the rattle....they never could get them out of my Camry!

    He says the car is safe to drive and the airbags won't prematurely deploy.

    This along with the fact that we are faced with needing new front brakes after only a year and 16K miles (actually they said they might last another 4K miles if I do not mind the screeching noise they are making) and I'd say Toyota quality is slipping!

    As far as the Honda, they too have a perceived good rep, less warranty though and I am not a fan of the new CRV styling. If only Subaru would put something this size out at a reasonable price!
  • charles64charles64 Member Posts: 13
    Hi all - just thought i would post a message here to report that the dealership fixed several of the issues with my 2006 RAV4 Limited (4 cyl). I took it in for the 30K service and told them about the issues I was having with the throttle lag, gear hunting when using cruise control, and the leak on the passenger side footwell. This is the same dealership that would not do anything about my possessed radio until they saw it misbehave for themselves, so I was prepared to have to battle them on these other issues that have been plaguing me and others in this forum.

    They resolved all of the issues without a fight, and the service rep said there were TSBs out for all of these issues. The throttle lag and cruise control issues were resolved with an upgrade/reprogramming for the ECU, and a replacement shield somewhere in the dash area resolved the leak issue. This was all done yesterday, so I have yet to verify the cruise control issue, but the throttle lag is definitely fixed. I'll check out the cruise control on a trip tomorrow, and I'll have to wait for another heavy rain to verify whether the leak issue was resolved.

    So - if you're still having these issues, get out to the dealership and get them fixed!
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    I'm curious...

    One of the only ways I can think of to "combat" the infamous "throttle lag" (1-2 second transaxle downshift delay/hesitation) is to revise the firmware so as to go ahead and downshift the transaxle upon entry into coastdown period (no pressure on teh gas pedal) but simultaneously "uprev" the engine to prevent any significant level of engine compression braking, braking which might otherwise potentially result in loss of directional control should the roadbed traction be poor.

    There are already posts indicating that FWD vehicles with stick shifts, like the Suzuki SX4 and the Honda Accord, are doing this, automatically up-reving the engine, to alleviate potential problems with engine compression braking when the driver downshifts.

    Along with the TSB that eliminates the "throttle lag" do you now notice the engine slightly "up-reving" occassionally during "coastdown" periods, say at 40-30 or 10-0 MPH..?

    But I am concerned about the TSB regarding the shiftiness under cruise control. I have assumed the shiftiness is/was due to an attempt to improve FE and it seems that any "improvement" toward less shiftiness would therefore get the immediate attention of the EPA/CARB.

    Or maybe that just overdid the shiftiness....and there was no FE gain, or it was so small as to be not really measureable.
  • charles64charles64 Member Posts: 13
    I did not notice any up-revving or downshifting during coast-down on the way home from work today - and after reading this I was playing around to test specifically for that.

    Not sure what the cause was for the shiftiness - but for me the gear hunting seemed to be isolated to relatively low upgrades. I have always read that the best way to optimize fuel economy was to be super smooth with the throttle and shifting - so the gear hunting behavior seems counter to that. I did not experience any hunting on flat roads, and on steep upgrades the trans shifted to a lower gear for most of the duration. One other behavior I noticed with the cruise control was that any downshift for a steep upgrade seemed to "hang" in the lower gear for a few beats longer than seemed necessary. After cresting a hill or leveling out, the trans would stay in the lower gear - then when the trans did finally upshift it seemed to be a beat out of sync with letting off the throttle....

    Anyway, I have a 200+ mile interstate trip tomorrow that will give the cruise control a good workout.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    Unlike you, the cruise control cannot "see" the road ahead, so the downshift to pull a grade will "seem" (is) delayed, as will the resulting upshift at the crest.

    I suspect that with the advent of so many cars with CVT and e-CVT transmissions the engineers are learning new tricks. For instance using the torque converter's OD lockup clutch to extend the 6-speed to 9-speeds and thereby keep the engine closer to the best FE in "all" cruising circumstances.
  • djmontdjmont Member Posts: 1
    The keyless entry on my 06 RAV4 just stopped working. The remotes appear to be working -- the little red light illuminates when push the buttons -- but nothing happens on the car.

    Has this happened to anybody else?
  • charles64charles64 Member Posts: 13
    Does anyone have information about how often the auto trans fluid should be changed on the 2006 RAV4 (4 cyl, 4x4)? I am getting conflicting info from 2 dealerships - one recommends changing it at 30k miles and the other says 100k.

    Also, if this needs to be changed, is this a do-it-yourself job or does it require specialized equipment/skills? Can't get a lot of info about this anywhere.

    Here are more details:

    I have a 2006 Rav4 limited, 4cyl 4x4, with just under 40K miles. At the 30K service, I thought the dealership changed the trans fluid - but they did not. At 35K I had the oil changed and tires rotated at a different dealership. They checked the trans fluid and said it was really dirty and should be replaced - at the tune of $155 for a flush and fill. I went back to the first dealership that did the 30K service and confirmed that they did not change the trans fluid. They checked the fluid and said it was fine - and that the trans conforms to international specs - no change needed until 100k miles. The first dealership said that it is normal for the trans fluid to get dark and that it is fine.

    So - 5k miles later I go back to the second dealership for an oil/filter change and tire rotation - and they again bring up the trans fluid - all concerned about how dirty it is and that they recommend this $155 flush and fill.

    I went around and around with them a bit about this. I've got the recommendation of one dealership vs another, and there is zero info in the manual/service specs about changing the trans fluid.

    Can anyone shed any light on this? Is there a modified service schedule I should be following? I do not tow anything, and I drive a mix of highway and local miles.

    Thanks-
    C
  • ajg33ajg33 Member Posts: 13
    Has anybody had to replace their brakes yet for their '06 Rav4? I have 45k miles and have traveled all over the place in the car. I don't notice any rubbing but was curious when other people are replacing their brakes? Thanks.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    This is quoted directly from Toyota's Sourcebooks from their online eShowroom.

    Regular Maintenance
    Both manual and automatic transmissions require regular maintenance to help ensure their proper operation. Transmission fluid loses its friction properties and can become contaminated over time. The maintenance schedules in Repair Manuals or Owners Manuals indicate the appropriate intervals based on how the vehicle is used.
    Currently (2008) for vehicles that are used for towing (severe service), recommended replacement of the automatic transmission fluid at is 60,000 miles or 72 months and every 30,000 miles, or 72 months thereafter. This is for drivers who regularly:
    • Tow a trailer, or use a camper or car top carrier
    • Operate on dusty, rough, muddy or salt-spread roads
    • Travel short distances (less than 5 miles) when the outside temperature is below freezing
    • Engage in low speed driving for long distances or extensive idling (e.g. police, taxi drivers or delivery personnel)
    Manual transmission vehicles regularly used for towing should have their transmission fluid replaced at 30,000 miles or 36 months and every 30,000 or 36 months thereafter.
    The normal maintenance schedule for both automatic and manual transmission does not recommend an inspection of the fluid or any specific replacement interval. This is for vehicles that are not routinely used for towing (severe service).
    Automatic transmissions using ATF-WS fluid (2004–2008) have an inspection interval of 100,000 miles and no specific replacement interval.

    Checking the Fluid Level in Automatiatic Transmissions
    The fluid level in an automatic transmission should be checked with the dipstick after the transmission has been warmed up to normal operating temperature (approximately 158°F to 176°F). As a rule of thumb, if the graduated end of the dipstick is too hot to hold, the fluid is at operating temperature.
    The fluid level is proper if it is in the “hot” range between “hot maximum” and “hot minimum.” The “cool” level on the dipstick should be used as a reference only when the transmission is cold. The correct fluid level should only be checked when the fluid is hot and the transmission is in “Park” with the engine running at idle.
    To ensure proper operation of the automatic transmission, the fluid level should be kept at the correct level at all times. If the fluid level is too low, the transmission oil pump can draw in air, causing air to mix with the fluid. This lowers the hydraulic pressure, causing slippage and potential damage to the clutches and brakes. If the fluid level is too high, the planetary gears and other rotating components agitate the fluid. This can cause air bubbles to collect in the fluid and may result in similar complications as a low fluid level. In addition, this aerated fluid tends to rise in the case and may leak from the breather plug at the top of the transmission or through the dipstick tube.

    Transmissions using ATF-WS (some model Toyotas 2004–2008) are sealed units and do not require a fluid change during the life of the vehicle under normal operating conditions. Therefore fluid checks are not necessary and the dipsticks have been eliminated on these vehicles.

    In a transaxle (front wheel drive) the differential is part of the transaxle and is lubricated by the same fluid as the transmission, regardless if it’s an automatic or manual transmission.
    Automatiatic Transmission Fluid (ATF)
    Automatic transmission fluid (ATF) is a special hi-grade petroleum-based mineral oil mixed with several special additives. From 1994 through 2008 the main types of automatic transmission fluid used in Toyota vehicles are:
    • Dexron III
    • Type T
    • Type T-II
    • Type T-IV
    • ATF-WS
    Transmissions specifying Dexron III can only use that type of fluid.
    Type T-IV can replace both Type T and Type T-II.
    ATF-WS is only used on some later model Toyotas (2004–2008) and has the advantage of a 100,000 mile inspection interval and no required fluid change during the life of the vehicle under normal operating conditions. Therefore the transmissions on these vehicles are sealed, eliminating the transmission fluid dipstick.
  • sunazcitysunazcity Member Posts: 1
    I recently replaced my front brakes at 40,000
  • judy34judy34 Member Posts: 1
    I recently brought my Rav4 in because the brake booster failed. What a scary experience that was, I was driving slowly thank God, when I had to use my brakes but they weren't there for me. I immediately took my Rav4 to our family mechanic and his findings were the brake booster. $900.00 to repair. The kicker tho is this, he's not sure if the master cylinder played a role in the booster's failure, he needs to replace the part then test it so we are looking at another possible repair bill. ($600-$700) My vehicle is 12 days over the 36 months and it has 44,000 miles.
    This is my first Toyota and my last. I have always had good fortune with my cars.

    I am curious if anyone else has had or are having the same issues?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Sorry to hear about the timing, though the miles would have disqualified it even 13 days ago.

    I doubt Toyota would help, otherwise why sell extended warranties. I can say that extended warranties on them are very cheap, and $700 is really not that bad after the 3rd year.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    When a brake booster fails all you have to do to apply braking is PRESS HARDER.

    You post implies, clearly, that something more than the booster had failed, was failing.
  • ajg33ajg33 Member Posts: 13
    I have a 2006 Rav4 that had a tire that was loosing air. I would refill the tire and after a week or so it would loose pressure and the tire pressure light would turn on. I took it to a local mechanic and found that it was the tire pressure sensor valve that was leaking air. For $20 he replaced it with a regular value versus $100 for a sensor valve. The problem is the tire pressure light on the dash is still on. If I ask the dealer to reset the light will it go off or will the light always be on because one of the tires does not have a sensor? Thanks.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    Now you get to pay $100 for a new sensor valve plus the $20 you paid to have what was more likely than otherwise a perfectly good sensor valve thrown away.

    Also more likely than otherwise it was simply a defective valve core/seal, or maybe even a valve core seal seat, easy repair or at worse a 25 ct part.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    The light will just come back on.
  • tucson2tucson2 Member Posts: 1
    I had to have my brakes replaced at 29,000. Now at 50k they seem to be going out again. I have never had to replace my brakes before 65,000 on any other car I have driven.

    Is anyone else having this problem.
  • dylanmomdylanmom Member Posts: 1
    Got front brakes changed at 45K and now back for rear at 60K. Considering I'm rough on brakes and from what I've read so far, I think I'm doing well!
  • neeners1005neeners1005 Member Posts: 4
    I have a 2006 Rav4 Sport Edition 4WD bought brand new that I have had problems with since I got it. First I had to have the radio replaced 4 times in 3 months due to electrical issues (starting when I had the car 1 month) then I had to have the transmission reprogrammed due to an electrical issue at 5 months. I was good until I had the car a little over 1 1/2 years and 27,000 miles when I had to replace my first set of brakes (December 2007), my brake pads (front and back) were down to metal and the rotors needed to be replaced. In December 2008 at roughly 44,000 miles I had to bring it in again b/c of the front brakes and again I was metal on metal. In August 2009 at 53,000 miles I brought it in for an oil change and found out my waterpump was gone and I had to get it replaced. Now in October 2009 I had to bring it in yet again for the brakes and at 58,000 miles, I was at 95% wear on the pads (front and back this time). I spoke to the Service Manager at my local dealership and was told that my brakes were not a problem and it is normal to change them ever 14,000 miles, I also spoke with the Toyota Regional Service Manager and was told the same thing. I realize I do A LOT of driving but this model has horrible brake wear. I had a 2001 RAV4 before this and only changed my brakes every 30 - 35,000 miles.
  • mark19mark19 Member Posts: 123
    you need to stop buying the Toyota stock pads, that's the problem! After three times and you're only getting 14,000 miles out of them? That is horrible, but be honest how hard are you braking? Slamming on the brakes 10 feet before you have to stop? I am NOT defending Toyota, as I've seen their pads go in about 28-30k miles. Remember your newer RAV4 is heavier than the 2001 model. But ever think that Toyota made a pad like this so that you'd keep giving them your money? I say STOP! time for another pad!

    I would suggest www.Porterfield-brakes.com they are a performance shop in california, they make a high performance street pad made of carbon-kevlar, last car I had their pads on they lasted me 50,000 miles and this was not at a cost of performance! R4-S is the name of the pad. They make other pads, but they're for racing and wouldn't work on normal street driving. They are about $90 for the fronts and $80 for the rears. But.. They are much better performance and last MUCH longer! The stock pads from Toyota were always "mushy" and *yawn inducing* in performance. So give the Porterfield a try, I think you'll like them. I know I do :shades:
  • neeners1005neeners1005 Member Posts: 4
    Thank you for the suggestion! I hope to not have the vehicle for more than the next 5k miles though (too much money sunk into a 3 1/2 year old vehicle). This vehicle has been dissapointing to me all the way aroud from gas milage (20MPG Highway - 18MPG City) to mechanical issues that Toyota doesn't want to address. I also have a 2006 Solara that is going to need it's 1st brake change soon so I will try the brakes you suggested :shades: .
  • mark19mark19 Member Posts: 123
    you're welcome for the suggestion! glad to help!

    One thing I did forget was that with the porterfield brakes I just received, they had put an adhesive-type (stick-on) shim on the back of the brake pad for mine. What happened was that the brakes heated up and began to bake that stick-on shim off to the point it was smelling like BBQ and smoking too! ouch. I since removed the stick on shim and replaced it with the factory shims (got them from the dealer) along with some brake grease (white sticky stuff from toyota) and no more issues. I think porterfield wanted to give people shims but this shim didn't work. So if they come with stick on shims remove them, replace with the factory metal shims.

    I still say they're great pads, just a slight modification is what I needed. Just helping you when you do order them up. :)

    Also- I don't blame you for dumping the rav4. The treatment toyota has given me as well I don't plan on looking to them for my next vehicle.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    you need to find out which of "your" drivers are driving along with their left foot resting lightly on the brake pedal.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    "..great pads, just a slight modification...needed..."

    Or you need to find out who is riding the brakes.
  • mark19mark19 Member Posts: 123
    I'm talking about a modifcation to the stick-on shim that Porterfield added which doesn't need to be there and to be replaced with the factory/stock shim instead. The stick-on shim was incompatible with the characteristics of the carbon-kevlar material. Remove it, replace with the factory shims (or get new from the dealer) and all is well. Even Porterfield agreed that they're not going to be adding it on future pads after I reported the issue.

    So I'm not sure what you're talking about in your post, riding the brakes? Had nothing to do with the shim that was incompatible.
  • raviola4raviola4 Member Posts: 52
    I'm really surprised with this post. I have a 2006 Rav and other than the radio problems that have been well documented, not a single problem. Brakes still going strong at a little over 30,000 miles. Tires, the same. Obviously not driven as much as post above but still surprised at the problems noted. I remember a past Honda Accord i had which was doing great on brakes till my teenage son's started driving. Braking to quick stops will do that for sure. Anyway, probably keep this Rav for several more years (paid off now). Thinking of getting a 2010 Camry Hybrid to replace our 03 TL. But money only obstacle.
  • gilvkonagilvkona Member Posts: 31
    I purchased two Michelin tires for my RAV4 with idential speed rating to the original equipment on my vehicle. I think it was 100H. When it came time to replace the next two tires, they could not get the same tires. Since I could not wait several weeks for new tires, I replaced them with 99S tires made by Michelin. They put these on the front and said I could not rotate my tires anymore. I notice no handling problems with the car. I have spent about $200 a tires so I don't want to swap these out. Does anyone know if the tire dealer gave me some bad advice?
Sign In or Register to comment.