Are you a current Michigan-based car shopper? A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/2 for details.
Edmunds says the following with those options (except CF which is not on Edmunds):
Invoice = $30,895 MSRP = $34,975 TMV® = $32,676
It looks good to me. However, I don't know where Edmunds gets this TMV because it is always a little high from my experience. The state of NJ are the ones riping you off. I am thankful for the $300 cap on automobile sales tax in SC. We get raped on annual auto property taxes here. I feel lucky to have wiggled my way around them for the 1st year on my new QX4.
I have a 2002 Highlander which was built in August 2001. I get a lot of wind noise above 40 MPH. When there is just a slight breeze out, it sounds like gusts of wind hitting my vehicle.
I've read about the TSB for the door seals, but people had previously described that problem as a reed sound & only on very windy days. So I'm not sure if that is the cause of the noise. Does anyone know if Toyota was still using the old seals in August 2001? I hadn't read that anyone was still having this problem on 2002s. Any thoughts on the source of the wind noise? I have made sure the cross bars on the roof rack were pushed to the rear.
Can someone give me the TSB to fix the sunroof popping sound, as well. I starting getting the sunroof popping, glove box rattle & creaking seat belt latch, after about 3,000 miles. Thanks
I am trying to choose between an HL and Pathfinder. Both limited/LE with all options, quoted at invoice price, approx. 31K. I have limited snow/off-road use for the vehicle. What I like about the HL is the smoother ride and better mileage. What is good about the PF is the bose sound system and the memory seating. (My wife and I will be sharing the driving and we have different seat settings)
What do you guys think? Any opinion is appreciated.
I didn't not even consider the Pathfinder when I bought in January even though the QX4 I bought is a mechanical twin because I just don't care for the way the Pathfinder looks. I looked at the Highlander and the 4Runner. Infiniti was giving 2.9% financing and Nissan products are not having the sludge problem that Toyota is having so I bought the QX4. I love it and the Luxury dealer treats you like a real person. The QX4 is the lowest priced luxury SUV in the market. It is only about $2000 higher than the loaded Pathfinder LE but well worth it based on its very classy appearance and style.
They are really 2 different vehicles although the 2 at the top of my list as well. Both are well made but the Highlander is more for on-road while the Pathfinder does much better off road. The PF has an auto mode 4WD but sends 100% of the torque to the rear until it senses slippage. This is OK if you are traveling forward but if you are taking a corner and start to slide I question whether the vehicle can react in time. Currently I own a 2000 Maxima and I love the Bose, I don't want to give that up - the sound is incredible, you can hear every nuance like you are listening in an acoustically perfect room - it is to die for. But the JBL is not bad - just not as good. There is one thing that bugs me about my car and that is the headrest/restraint. It angles forward too much and I feel I can't relax and put my head back far enough. I haven't figured out what to do about this and the PF has essentially the same seat. I believe this is contributing to my getting a stiff neck and sore shoulders. Anyway good luck with your decision.
"But we all buy and own SUVs, at least most of us, for circumstances wherein equal traction is not available, and that is exactly where the RX and the HL fails us."
Is that not what it is designed to do, to put more torque where you need it. If you say that it will be 50/50 with equal traction then what conditions cause it to be 90/10? I'm just curious as to how that split happens unless the back end is slipping.
"There is one thing that bugs me about my car and that is the headrest/restraint. It angles forward too much and I feel I can't relax and put my head back far enough."
I don't know if it's possible on the Maxima, but some owners of HLs have addressed this dilemma by reversing the headrest, allowing the tilt to go slightly rearward.
The HL, nor the RX, is suitable for ANY off-road use. And I am not referring to the "need" for a low range gearbox.
IMMHO what you need, as a minimum, in an SUV for "some" off-road, or highway use in Montana-like wintertime climates is:
1. Full-time (ANY roadbed condition) AWD that is torque bias to the rear. Engine "lagging" torque on the front wheels when decelerating in low traction conditions can quickly lead to spin-outs and/or loss of control.
2. A part-time (low traction surface use ONLY), fall back AWD/4WD system that LOCKS the center differential.
3. An actual or virtual(TRAC)rear LSD.
4. The ability to use snowchains if needed, first on the rear and then additionally, in the worse case, to the front. It is NEVER a good idea to have more roadbed traction in the front than it the rear, especially in low traction conditions.
Or in the alternative a Sequoia-like "virtualization" of of the above.
My "shade-tree" testing was done on an '00 and an '01 RX300, both AWD, the '01 with VSC/TRAC.
First "test":
A. Elevated the front wheels on a roller jack and block the rear wheels with home made wooden chocks with about a 30 degree incline. At idle the front wheels would rotate freely and there was no discernable torque applied to the rear wheels. On raising the throttle slowly and gently to 2000 RPM the speed of the front wheels would increase substantially and the vehicle would not move forward up the incline although one could now discern that some level of torque was reaching the rear wheels.
B. With the rear wheels elevated and the front wheels chocked in the very same manner at idle the rear wheels turned freely and one could discern some torque at the front wheels. As I raised the throttle position in this circumstance the front wheels started to climb the incline almost instantly.
Second test:
A. All four wheels off the ground and soft wood 1X2s inserted through the rear wheels against the brake caliper the throttle could be raised to 2000 RPM without breaking, only slightly stressing, the 1X2s, the front wheels spun freely throughout.
B. 1X2s inserted in the front wheels in the same manner the left front 1X2 broke almost immediately after raising the throttle above idle.
This surprised me but at no point was there any discernable action on the part of the VSC/TRAC system during these tests on the '01 AWD RX300.
The '01 was subsequently tested on a 4 wheel dyno and using the dyno to brake only the rear wheels would not restrain the increasing rotational speed of the front wheels with increasing throttle. Using the dyno to brake only the front wheels would restrain the increasing rotational rate of ALL four wheels.
To the best of our determination using the dyno the "instant" torque to the rear wheels on encountering disparate F/R traction coefficients was between 5 and 10% If the disparate traction coefficient was sustained for up to 30 seconds then the rear wheels would then recieve up to 25 to 30% of the total available engine torque.
We were fearful of going beyond 30 seconds out of concern for over-heating the VC.
Anybody else out there annoyed at the little things that Toyota manages to leave off this rig? Imports used to delight US buyers with little things they added. Here is a true import (made in Japan only so far) that sells for $30K and has
a) a cheap prop rod to hold up the hood instead of gas struts as found even on a lowly Taurus wagon's hood b) a fixed hatch window rather than a hinged pop-up window. Really nice when there is no room to lift the whole tailgate or you do not want a surprise when you open the gate and your loose gear tumbles out on the ground. Or if your bike carrier or trailer keeps your hatch from opening without disconnecting same. Ford Escape has it. Jeep Grand Cherokee and Liberty have it. C'mon, Toyota. c) no remote hatch release other than the key. If the key is in the house and you want to open the hatch....
Did I miss anything? Anybody want to correct this list or add to it in case Toyota cares enough to monitor the board? Maybe future HL buyers will get these items (which altogether probably cost about $40 to add at the factory) and Toyota's estimated $2500 profit per vehicle will take a hit.
Am not saying the HL is not a nice piece of work, the demand certainly says they hit a sweet spot. But Toyota really cuts the corners.
Oh, and when they redesign this rig I hope they move the rear seat cushion about 2 inches higher where American-sized people need it to be. A reclining rear seat is cool, but not when it is built like a beach chair.
I don't get your point on the rear door. There is no "release" needed because it has a door handle release on it. The only purpose a remote release would have it to start the opening process so you don't strain your fingers. It is no more difficult than operating the driver's side door.
Guys, Thanks for your suggestions. I checked out QX4 as advised by bigorange30. I liked QX4 but could not really justify the $3500+ premium for almost same features as LE. There is a .9 APR though. Also I test drove the RX300, liked that better. Again thinking whether to shell out extra $7000 over highlander.
I agree with you on the first two items. (Use of a prop rod to hold up hood and the non-opening of the rear hatch glass.)
We were really accustomed to opening the the glass only in our Taurus and Sable wagons for access to the cars. This was a nice feature, and I think the HL, already a great vehicle, would be enhanced by adding this function. I would gladly give up the rear wiper, which is used infrequently, for the opening glass, which would be used everyday.
The one thing that really annoys me about the Highlander is that there isn't a power window in the back hatch. My mother's 4 runner has this so obviously Toyota has the capability. It would make the vehicle so much more flexible. I wonder if it would help out on the buffeting noise too if you could crack the back window as you drove.
Is this something a body shop could do aftermarket? Its a feature I really want.
The rear window opening would be nice, and I have to think there's a way to keep the wiper.
As for the other complaints about being a cheap car, I guess I didn't know how bad I had it. I think it's testament to the quality of the vehicle that "problems" are as trivial as being able to check the gas guage without having to actually put the key in the ignition.
Have your dealer look up TSB NVO12-01 Title is "Wind noise at 'A' pillar" Dated November 30, 2001 Front door weather strips, left and right, were changed in accordance with this bulletin and the noises went away on my vehicle. Old part number 67861-48020 rh 67862-48020 lh New part ends in 21 instead of 20 Warranty covered this change at no cost.
This noise was most noticeable when gusty wind conditions were present and speeds were 50 mph or above
A word of caution: Those head "rests" are there for safety. Head restraints should be adjusted properly (as high as and as close to you heard as possible) to catch your head and prevent your neck from violently snapping rearward in a rear-end colission.
I completely agree with the assessment of Toyota's cheapness. My wife and I narrowed our search down to the Highlander and the Pathfinder. Not only was the PF significantly cheaper in 'real world' prices, it had several extra features (eg: power passenger seat, memory seating) a fully loaded HL doesn't ever offer. It aggravated the hell out of me, but wife clearly preferred the HL and since it's her car, that's the one we got. Clearly Toyota is doing so because it is able to and it's also making sure that Lexus RX 300 owners get a few extra "special" features to justify the extra $5000 over a loaded HL.
I did spoke with Lexington Toyota and agree that they weren't interested in the special order.
I am dealing with Howe Motors in Claremont, NH. I've been working with a salesman there named Ray who has been very helpful and is giving me a pretty good price (<$700 over invoice). If you contact him, please mention my name. My closest dealer, White River Toyota in White River Junction, Vermont was also willing to do a special order, but was higher in price.
I agree with all the comments about this nice Camry station wagon. Other cheap tricks:
-Poor basic front seat lighting - only one master light, so you can't allow front passenger reading; -Tiny odometer and guages; the mechanisms are the same as any other car; -Inability to add fog lights; this should be a basic add-on, especially for those of us who don't like leather seats (Ltd).
Market share speaks for itself but I feel that Toyota aimed low on the little things just to be annoying. This is my first Toyota and I'll evaluate all this little items much more carefully next time.
I agree whole-heartedly with your comments regarding the low height of the rear seat cushion. Perhaps this was the only way Toyota could achieve a flat floor when folding the rear seat, but as far as comfort, I pity any adult having to sit back there for an extended trip. I also find the front passenger cushion a poor design as it does not adjust for tilt. Many have commented on how it is pitched too far forward resulting in the feeling that one will slide forward off the seat. Regarding the third seat option, I believe that the upcoming RX300 will have a longer wheelbase and offer a third seat.
The Highlander appears to succeed despite its shortcomings because of its niche in this market -smaller [though just as expensive] than the Pilot/MDX yet offering the V6 that CRV lacks.
The CR-V doesn't lack a V6. It has a perfectly capable engine that just happens to be a 4 cylinder. Maybe you feel it should have this or that, but that is your opinion. C&D Television did a mini review of an almost $35K Highlander. I'll take my $21K CR-V, 4 banger and all. $14K is a lot of money.
I have posted before concerning an annoying creak in the driver's seat of my 2002 Highlander. The dealer has worked on it three times and I thought the issue had finally been resolved until this morning when the noise returned. There have been others that have posted with the same problem and I am curious if you have been able to find a fix for this issue? This has been a very frustrating experience for me. I am very close to demanding a new seat.
I understand your need to have others agree with your buying decision, but you are making an apples to oranges comparison with your figures. Your $21K CR-V does not have the same equipment as a $35K Highlander. It does not have side air bags, stability control, 6 disc CD, leather (I don't think but could be wrong on that one), power seat, climate control, engine immobilizer, 220 HP, 3500 lb towing, rear disc brakes, ABS or moonroof (again, I may be wrong on those). Your CRV is a good bit smaller on the inside as well. Your values may not dictate $14K worth of difference but it may to others.
If one wants a "cheap" Highlander, those are available for well under $30K. Like the CR-V, the HL offers a very competent 4 cylinder engine.
Actually the CRV comes with the following items that you said it doesn't come with.
The Crv comes with... 1. Side air bags 2. Stability control 3. 6 Disc in dash cd player 4. engine immobolizer 5. rear disc breaks 6. Power moonroof 7. ABS plus. for 1 k a nice set of leather seats
So I think your comparison is off base just a little bit. So for 14 k more you can get more towing, power seats and worse mileage and a far worse polluter (http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/Sport_Utility_Vehicle2002.shtml). The acceleration of the 4 banger in the CRV gives the same 0-60 speed if not better (depends what reports you use)
I guess it really comes down to drivers preference. My father looked at the highlander and the 02 crv and ended up with the crv because you get a lot more for your buck and the crv met his needs. I suppose if he had a 18 foot Sea Ray he would have opted for the Higlander.
I stand corrected. The CRV EX does have ABS, 4 wheel disc brakes and a moonroof. It does not have stability control, leather, engine immobilizer (don't confuse that with an alarm), 5/60K power train warranty, climate control, power driver's seat or the interior room of a Highlander.
I realize this is not a comparative forum but I wanted to correct my previous post. I'm glad you're both happy with your purchases. It sounds like you researched it well and discovered that the CR-V was a good value for you. Happy motoring and if I'm ever in the Honda topics, I'll be very interested to hear what you have to say about your cars.
Actually the CRV has the immobilizer for both the LX and the EX models and a security radio. It doesn't have a car alarm, but you can get it as an accessory for 150 bucks. The seating room is actually a smidgit bigger in the Crv but the highlander definitely wins in the cargo area behind the rear seats. Also the Highlander definitely has a better warranty, but who are we kidding... Toyota and Honda are incredibly reliable, do we even need a warranty!!!
What is the stability control and how does it work? I guess I was thinking of the stabilizer bar the CRV has both in the front and the rear of the vehicle.
By the way, I love the Highlander I think it is an awesome vehicle!
CR-V does not offer stability control in the US models. They do offer it in Japan, though.
CR-V is roomy but it's a compact with a smallish payload, not on par with a Highlander. I think Honda is better off comparing the CR-V with a RAV4, which compete in the same class.
I'm actually in the process of pricing both of them in the DC area, using no-haggle dealers.
Sheehy.com has CR-V EX autos for $22.8k, oddly that's above MSRP.
Fitzmall.com has Highlanders for $700 above invoice. To match the CR-V's equipment, I'd order a 4 cyl AWD auto and add a moonroof and side air bags, for a total of $24.6k. The difference is less than two grand. I'd add keyless on my own since they don't sell it separately.
OK, the CR-V has alloys but they are 15", and I'd actually prefer 16" steel. The V6 adds about $1400 to the price, still nowhere even close to $14k grand. It's actually only about a quarter of that difference, even with the V6.
Plus, 850 lb payload simply cannot compare with what the Highlander offers, nor can the towing. It's a beefier platform, a true mid-size, while the CR-V is a roomy compact. Plus Toyota's warranty is a lot longer on the powertrain.
I can see budget shoppers that don't need to tow or carry much payload choosing the CR-V, but I think the $2 grand is easily worth it for the upgrade. Even the $3400 is for the V6.
That sounds like a decent deal to me! Does that HL come with a 6 cd changer? How does the 4 cylinder HL accelerate? It seems like it would be slightly bogged down, is it?
I spent alot of last year cross shopping the Highlander and the (old) CRV. I really like the Honda, its a great smaller SUV. It has some real positive points. I knew a little about the new CRV before making the decision to get the Toyota. I decided on the Highlander based on more room, more power, more towing capacity and the effective AWD system. I did a special order from Japan and got the 2002 with AWD, V6 and a few extras (roof rack, etc) for a little over $25,000. Thats a bit over $2000 more (compared to the '02 CRV) for a V6 with more room and capacity. I have sat in the back seat of the new CRV....seems smaller by far that my HL. I went on a recent road trip to Chicago with 4 teenagers.......1000 miles round trip. It was nice and roomy in the Toyota and I would not want to do the same in the CRV ('02).....too small!
wow...way to go Toyota with the sludge warranty being unlimited! That really says a lot about Toyota! I really hope Honda would do the same if something like that happened with the V.
They could fix the design problem that makes the engine have a tendency to gel so that you will be sure that it will not happen and strand you out on the road somewhere or happen after the 8 years is up.
On my 01 AWD RX I put 30mm spacers all around, 17X8 wheels, 235/65 Michelin CTs. 3" wider track, lower, stiffer, sidewall, more contact patch, just better handling all around.
Why would you want to put wider tires on? Not only are they unnecessary, wider tires will cost more. If you get the same profile, the tire diameter will also be bigger, which will affect the odometer readings.
If you get AWD, all 4 wheels are driving, so there shouldn't be any issues with traction. In fact, wider tires are worse in the rain.
Just my opinion, save your money and stick to the recommended size.
Comments
SR, BE, TO, VD, EJ, LA, HD, CF
MSRP 35154.00
Price breakdown:
Car - 31933.96
Tax (6%) - 1916.04
Lic and title - 150.00
Doc fee - 20.00
TOTAL: 34020.00
Did I rob or was I robbed? What do you think?
Thank you
Dmitry from Northern NJ
dmitry9999 at yahoo dot com
Invoice = $30,895 MSRP = $34,975 TMV® = $32,676
It looks good to me. However, I don't know where Edmunds gets this TMV because it is always a little high from my experience. The state of NJ are the ones riping you off. I am thankful for the $300 cap on automobile sales tax in SC. We get raped on annual auto property taxes here. I feel lucky to have wiggled my way around them for the 1st year on my new QX4.
BTW: What is CF?
I've read about the TSB for the door seals, but people had previously described that problem as a reed sound & only on very windy days. So I'm not sure if that is the cause of the noise. Does anyone know if Toyota was still using the old seals in August 2001? I hadn't read that anyone was still having this problem on 2002s. Any thoughts on the source of the wind noise? I have made sure the cross bars on the roof rack were pushed to the rear.
Can someone give me the TSB to fix the sunroof popping sound, as well. I starting getting the sunroof popping, glove box rattle & creaking seat belt latch, after about 3,000 miles. Thanks
options, quoted at invoice price, approx. 31K. I have limited snow/off-road
use for the vehicle.
What I like about the HL is the smoother ride and better mileage. What is good
about the PF is the bose sound system and the memory seating. (My wife and I
will be sharing the driving and we have different seat settings)
What do you guys think? Any opinion is appreciated.
There is one thing that bugs me about my car and that is the headrest/restraint. It angles forward too much and I feel I can't relax and put my head back far enough. I haven't figured out what to do about this and the PF has essentially the same seat. I believe this is contributing to my getting a stiff neck and sore shoulders.
Anyway good luck with your decision.
"But we all buy and own SUVs, at least most of us, for circumstances wherein equal traction is not available, and that is exactly where the RX and the HL fails us."
Is that not what it is designed to do, to put more torque where you need it. If you say that it will be 50/50 with equal traction then what conditions cause it to be 90/10? I'm just curious as to how that split happens unless the back end is slipping.
Thanks,
CF - floor mats, about $150 or so.
I don't know if it's possible on the Maxima, but some owners of HLs have addressed this dilemma by reversing the headrest, allowing the tilt to go slightly rearward.
Just a thought....
IMMHO what you need, as a minimum, in an SUV for "some" off-road, or highway use in Montana-like wintertime climates is:
1. Full-time (ANY roadbed condition) AWD that is torque bias to the rear. Engine "lagging" torque on the front wheels when decelerating in low traction conditions can quickly lead to spin-outs and/or loss of control.
2. A part-time (low traction surface use ONLY), fall back AWD/4WD system that LOCKS the center differential.
3. An actual or virtual(TRAC)rear LSD.
4. The ability to use snowchains if needed, first on the rear and then additionally, in the worse case, to the front. It is NEVER a good idea to have more roadbed traction in the front than it the rear, especially in low traction conditions.
Or in the alternative a Sequoia-like "virtualization" of of the above.
First "test":
A. Elevated the front wheels on a roller jack and block the rear wheels with home made wooden chocks with about a 30 degree incline. At idle the front wheels would rotate freely and there was no discernable torque applied to the rear wheels. On raising the throttle slowly and gently to 2000 RPM the speed of the front wheels would increase substantially and the vehicle would not move forward up the incline although one could now discern that some level of torque was reaching the rear wheels.
B. With the rear wheels elevated and the front wheels chocked in the very same manner at idle the rear wheels turned freely and one could discern some torque at the front wheels. As I raised the throttle position in this circumstance the front wheels started to climb the incline almost instantly.
Second test:
A. All four wheels off the ground and soft wood 1X2s inserted through the rear wheels against the brake caliper the throttle could be raised to 2000 RPM without breaking, only slightly stressing, the 1X2s, the front wheels spun freely throughout.
B. 1X2s inserted in the front wheels in the same manner the left front 1X2 broke almost immediately after raising the throttle above idle.
This surprised me but at no point was there any discernable action on the part of the VSC/TRAC system during these tests on the '01 AWD RX300.
The '01 was subsequently tested on a 4 wheel dyno and using the dyno to brake only the rear wheels would not restrain the increasing rotational speed of the front wheels with increasing throttle. Using the dyno to brake only the front wheels would restrain the increasing rotational rate of ALL four wheels.
To the best of our determination using the dyno the "instant" torque to the rear wheels on encountering disparate F/R traction coefficients was between 5 and 10% If the disparate traction coefficient was sustained for up to 30 seconds then the rear wheels would then recieve up to 25 to 30% of the total available engine torque.
We were fearful of going beyond 30 seconds out of concern for over-heating the VC.
a) a cheap prop rod to hold up the hood instead of gas struts as found even on a lowly Taurus wagon's hood
b) a fixed hatch window rather than a hinged pop-up window. Really nice when there is no room to lift the whole tailgate or you do not want a surprise when you open the gate and your loose gear tumbles out on the ground. Or if your bike carrier or trailer keeps your hatch from opening without disconnecting same. Ford Escape has it. Jeep Grand Cherokee and Liberty have it. C'mon, Toyota.
c) no remote hatch release other than the key. If the key is in the house and you want to open the hatch....
Did I miss anything? Anybody want to correct this list or add to it in case Toyota cares enough to monitor the board? Maybe future HL buyers will get these items (which altogether probably cost about $40 to add at the factory) and Toyota's estimated $2500 profit per vehicle will take a hit.
Am not saying the HL is not a nice piece of work, the demand certainly says they hit a sweet spot. But Toyota really cuts the corners.
Oh, and when they redesign this rig I hope they move the rear seat cushion about 2 inches higher where American-sized people need it to be. A reclining rear seat is cool, but not when it is built like a beach chair.
There, I feel better now.
- Fuel gauge does not hold its reading after engine is off
- Door-ajar indicator does not tell me which door is open.
All these are standard on my Honda Accord.
I live in the Boston area and I was thinking of special ordering a Limited without leather seats.
I spoke with Lexington Toyota in Mass, but they did not seem interested in doing a special order.
What dealer did you order thru and was your price below MSRP ?
By the way, it seems that there's a real shortage of HL's at the dealerships in the Boston area.
Thanks,
Stuart in Boston
I checked out QX4 as advised by bigorange30. I liked QX4 but could not
really justify the $3500+ premium for almost same features as LE. There
is a .9 APR though. Also I test drove the RX300, liked that better.
Again thinking whether to shell out extra $7000 over highlander.
I agree with you on the first two items. (Use of a prop rod to hold up hood and the non-opening of the rear hatch glass.)
We were really accustomed to opening the the glass only in our Taurus and Sable wagons for access to the cars. This was a nice feature, and I think the HL, already a great vehicle, would be enhanced by adding this function. I would gladly give up the rear wiper, which is used infrequently, for the opening glass, which would be used everyday.
Is this something a body shop could do aftermarket? Its a feature I really want.
As for the other complaints about being a cheap car, I guess I didn't know how bad I had it.
I would like to see
Dark grey leather as an option (or dark grey cloth)
GPS Navigation
Thanks
Title is "Wind noise at 'A' pillar"
Dated November 30, 2001
Front door weather strips, left and right, were changed in accordance with this bulletin and the noises went away on my vehicle.
Old part number 67861-48020 rh
67862-48020 lh
New part ends in 21 instead of 20
Warranty covered this change at no cost.
This noise was most noticeable when gusty wind conditions were present and speeds were 50 mph or above
Those head "rests" are there for safety. Head restraints should be adjusted properly (as high as and as close to you heard as possible) to catch your head and prevent your neck from violently snapping rearward in a rear-end colission.
I did spoke with Lexington Toyota and agree that they weren't interested in the special order.
I am dealing with Howe Motors in Claremont, NH. I've been working with a salesman there named Ray who has been very helpful and is giving me a pretty good price (<$700 over invoice). If you contact him, please mention my name. My closest dealer, White River Toyota in White River Junction, Vermont was also willing to do a special order, but was higher in price.
Let me know if you need any additional info.
-Dave
-Poor basic front seat lighting - only one master light, so you can't allow front passenger reading;
-Tiny odometer and guages; the mechanisms are the same as any other car;
-Inability to add fog lights; this should be a basic add-on, especially for those of us who don't like leather seats (Ltd).
Market share speaks for itself but I feel that Toyota aimed low on the little things just to be annoying. This is my first Toyota and I'll evaluate all this little items much more carefully next time.
Anyone know how to remove the bars? They didn't know how to do it at my dealer here in Milwaukee...
The Highlander appears to succeed despite its shortcomings because of its niche in this market -smaller [though just as expensive] than the Pilot/MDX yet offering the V6 that CRV lacks.
If one wants a "cheap" Highlander, those are available for well under $30K. Like the CR-V, the HL offers a very competent 4 cylinder engine.
The Crv comes with...
1. Side air bags
2. Stability control
3. 6 Disc in dash cd player
4. engine immobolizer
5. rear disc breaks
6. Power moonroof
7. ABS
plus. for 1 k a nice set of leather seats
So I think your comparison is off base just a little bit. So for 14 k more you can get more towing, power seats and worse mileage and a far worse polluter (http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/Sport_Utility_Vehicle2002.shtml). The acceleration of the 4 banger in the CRV gives the same 0-60 speed if not better (depends what reports you use)
I guess it really comes down to drivers preference. My father looked at the highlander and the 02 crv and ended up with the crv because you get a lot more for your buck and the crv met his needs. I suppose if he had a 18 foot Sea Ray he would have opted for the Higlander.
carguy62 "Honda CR-V" Apr 30, 2002 9:24am
Let's focus on the Highlander, eh?
Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
I realize this is not a comparative forum but I wanted to correct my previous post. I'm glad you're both happy with your purchases. It sounds like you researched it well and discovered that the CR-V was a good value for you.
Happy motoring and if I'm ever in the Honda topics, I'll be very interested to hear what you have to say about your cars.
What is the stability control and how does it work? I guess I was thinking of the stabilizer bar the CRV has both in the front and the rear of the vehicle.
By the way, I love the Highlander I think it is an awesome vehicle!
CR-V is roomy but it's a compact with a smallish payload, not on par with a Highlander. I think Honda is better off comparing the CR-V with a RAV4, which compete in the same class.
-juice
Sheehy.com has CR-V EX autos for $22.8k, oddly that's above MSRP.
Fitzmall.com has Highlanders for $700 above invoice. To match the CR-V's equipment, I'd order a 4 cyl AWD auto and add a moonroof and side air bags, for a total of $24.6k. The difference is less than two grand. I'd add keyless on my own since they don't sell it separately.
OK, the CR-V has alloys but they are 15", and I'd actually prefer 16" steel. The V6 adds about $1400 to the price, still nowhere even close to $14k grand. It's actually only about a quarter of that difference, even with the V6.
Plus, 850 lb payload simply cannot compare with what the Highlander offers, nor can the towing. It's a beefier platform, a true mid-size, while the CR-V is a roomy compact. Plus Toyota's warranty is a lot longer on the powertrain.
I can see budget shoppers that don't need to tow or carry much payload choosing the CR-V, but I think the $2 grand is easily worth it for the upgrade. Even the $3400 is for the V6.
-juice
I went on a recent road trip to Chicago with 4 teenagers.......1000 miles round trip. It was nice and roomy in the Toyota and I would not want to do the same in the CRV ('02).....too small!
Seems like the contents may have been changed slightly since I first heard about this letter.
Toyota has extended their warranty against said gelling to eight years with unlimited mileage.
Now what could be fairer than that, I ask you?
Engine Sludge/Oil Gelling--Toyota's Customer Response
Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
I don't believe the sludge issue affects engine currently being built. The 2.2l 4 cylinder never was affected, actually.
-juice
I figured this out through an unfortunate and costly trial-and-error process.
But the new All-Terrain Pirelli Scorpions look sharp!
-juice
-juice
Not only are they unnecessary, wider tires will cost more.
If you get the same profile, the tire diameter will also be bigger, which will affect the odometer readings.
If you get AWD, all 4 wheels are driving, so there shouldn't be any issues with traction. In fact, wider tires are worse in the rain.
Just my opinion, save your money and stick to the recommended size.