Cross country drive...which vehicle do you take? (1 Viewer)

[tacoduck]

To clarify, I was charging for 30-40 minutes, but I’d stop and get a meal, use the bathroom, and then it’d be ready to go. What I was saying is that I never waited more than 10 minutes longer than I would have stopped anyway.

the 200 is safer, and bigger than the rav-4. Also, if you have a small “event” ie a deer strike or a fender bender, which vehicle would allow you to continue the journey even with body damage? The lc.

the only knock to the lc is range. My truck at 80mph gets around 12mpg. With 18 gal before the fuel light comes on, that’s not a lot of range.
at the end of the day, would you rather drive a truck that stickers for $85k new, or $30k new?

 

[stonepa]

the 200 is safer, and bigger than the rav-4. Also, if you have a small “event” ie a deer strike or a fender bender, which vehicle would allow you to continue the journey even with body damage? The lc.

the only knock to the lc is range. My truck at 80mph gets around 12mpg. With 18 gal before the fuel light comes on, that’s not a lot of range.
at the end of the day, would you rather drive a truck that stickers for $85k new, or $30k new?

Honestly, if the RAV4 hybrid could tow my trailer I’d drive it 99% of the time. If they ever come out with a Woodland edition of the Highlander Hybrid i would strongly consider trading my LC for that. Ive been driving LCs since 1987 but honestly for my current uses there are beginning to be better choices.

 

[eatSleepWoof]

I only read the first two pages, but it seems to me the locals are greatly exaggerating the safety aspects of a 200 series. For every benefit the weight/size gives it, there's an equivalent risk/downside. And I fail to see how a single 3000-mile long road-trip is any more dangerous than one hundred 30-mile long trips around town.

OP: you stated that space is not a concern, and that you will be equally comfortable in both vehicles. I'd say that makes the RAV4 a no-brainer choice.

Frankly, as much as I love my 200-series LX, if I didn't regularly drive off-road (and frequently on very rough trails), I wouldn't be driving a 6000lb, body-on-frame vehicle to begin with.

 

[tacoduck]

Honestly, if the RAV4 hybrid could tow my trailer I’d drive it 99% of the time. If they ever come out with a Woodland edition of the Highlander Hybrid i would strongly consider trading my LC for that. Ive been driving LCs since 1987 but honestly for my current uses there are beginning to be better choices.

I mean, I daily drove a Tacoma for 3 years. I’ve been in Toyota “value” cars, and IMO there is no comparison to a lc. I haven’t driven the rav4, but I’m guessing the interior cockpit is roughly the same size. In my taco, 2 grown men would be bumping elbows and fighting for space on the armrest. Fine for a 3 hour drive, but 3k miles? No way.

I also drove a 100 through a cat one hurricane. If you don’t think that awd and 6000lbs of weight are beneficial, well, there is an ass for every seat.

 

[coleAK]

I only read the first two pages, but it seems to me the locals are greatly exaggerating the safety aspects of a 200 series. For every benefit the weight/size gives it, there's an equivalent risk/downside. And I fail to see how a single 3000-mile long road-trip is any more dangerous than one hundred 30-mile long trips around town.

OP: you stated that space is not a concern, and that you will be equally comfortable in both vehicles. I'd say that makes the RAV4 a no-brainer choice.

Frankly, as much as I love my 200-series LX, if I didn't regularly drive off-road (and frequently on very rough trails), I wouldn't be driving a 6000lb, body-on-frame vehicle to begin with.

I fully agree. We all know this forum is heavily bias. Many people justify their super expensive purchase of a LC/LX with the stance of these trucks are superior in everything and every way in every condition. Yes they are reliable but think about this. In 2008 if you bought a highlander then bought another new highlander in 2020 you would have most likely spent less money then just buying a 2008 LC new in 2008. Think the 2008 LC would be more reliable in the long run then the 2020 highlander?

I’ve had a at least 1 LC almost continuously since 1993 (didn’t have one 2011-2013) 70, 80, and the 200. No way I would own a 200 if I didn’t off road and tow a large camper. There a way better on road and off road vehicles out there then a 200. Pretty much only drive the LX anymore when towing or going to off road. Drive it very infrequently in the winter. Our Tesla 3, MB e class, and Subaru Legacy are all way better for long trips and on the road then the LX.

 

[MTN2SND]

I only read the first two pages, but it seems to me the locals are greatly exaggerating the safety aspects of a 200 series. For every benefit the weight/size gives it, there's an equivalent risk/downside. And I fail to see how a single 3000-mile long road-trip is any more dangerous than one hundred 30-mile long trips around town.

OP: you stated that space is not a concern, and that you will be equally comfortable in both vehicles. I'd say that makes the RAV4 a no-brainer choice.

Frankly, as much as I love my 200-series LX, if I didn't regularly drive off-road (and frequently on very rough trails), I wouldn't be driving a 6000lb, body-on-frame vehicle to begin with.

No doubt. People drive bat s*** crazy all the time around the Seattle area and on I-5 down to Portland, but it's pretty boring drive heading east on I-90 once you get a little bit east of Snoqualmie Pass.

 

[eatSleepWoof]

No doubt. People drive bat s*** crazy all the time around the Seattle area and on I-5 down to Portland, but it's pretty boring drive heading east on I-90 once you get a little bit east of Snoqualmie Pass.

Yup; driving in cities/towns is the worst. Back in my motorcycle riding days I distinctly remember reading a study/article which concluded that most automotive accidents happen within 10 minutes of home.

 

[stonepa]

Yup; driving in cities/towns is the worst. Back in my motorcycle riding days I distinctly remember reading a study/article which concluded that most automotive accidents happen within 10 minutes of home.

Yeah - that’s why i moved.

 

[gx2lc]

Don’t NY my TX. Thanks.

Oh spare me I grew up in Texas, left for NYC to enter the corporate world post college where I wore cowboy boots to all my meetings, and now have returned (city girl wife in tow) for the next stage of life.

That said instead of ‘don’t (blue state) my Texas’ I think a more Texan way of doing things might be to demonstrate the benefits of individual freedoms so blue staters can better understand and perhaps embrace Texan values. Not sure how that would work, but I think it’s a good idea to make people feel welcomed.

sorry to get off topic. Back on topic.
Anyone here heard of ghost locomotion?
Your Safe Self-Driver - https://driveghost.com/ I am not keen to be an early adopter but would love to have this in my cruiser provided the tech isn’t vaporware

 

[40Man]

IIHS data factually shows lighter vehicles lead to higher death rates, as the link I posted above shows.

 

[gx2lc]

I think something else worth m

I fully agree. We all know this forum is heavily bias. Many people justify their super expensive purchase of a LC/LX with the stance of these trucks are superior in everything and every way in every condition. Yes they are reliable but think about this. In 2008 if you bought a highlander then bought another new highlander in 2020 you would have most likely spent less money then just buying a 2008 LC new in 2008. Think the 2008 LC would be more reliable in the long run then the 2020 highlander?

I’ve had a at least 1 LC almost continuously since 1993 (didn’t have one 2011-2013) 70, 80, and the 200. No way I would own a 200 if I didn’t off road and tow a large camper. There a way better on road and off road vehicles out there then a 200. Pretty much only drive the LX anymore when towing or going to off road. Drive it very infrequently in the winter. Our Tesla 3, MB e class, and Subaru Legacy are all way better for long trips and on the road then the LX.

As a former and future Tesla owner I agree and think a 500+ mile range CBT stands to revolutionize over landing (multi day car camping with air con...) with plenty of torque and ground clearance.

however I do find myself reaching for the LC200 day to day. It’s an emotional thing. Hearing the v8 hum. Sitting up high. Enjoying the ridiculously comfortable seats. Feeling that I could go anywhere in total comfort. I know it’s a dinosaur facing an imminent electric extinction. But damnit I’ll enjoy it to the end.

 

[bloc]

IIHS data factually shows lighter vehicles lead to higher death rates, as the link I posted above shows.

Per accident or mile driven?

Plus, a quote from the IIHS study:
"Bigger vehicles provide greater protection," Cicchino says. "If you're riding in one of the smallest vehicles on the road, you'll be at a disadvantage in a crash with almost any other vehicle around you."

The "bigger vehicle" providing factual data in their test was a toyota avalon or kia sorento. Aka a competitor to the rav4. The "smallest vehicle on the road" in their test was a yaris ia and a kia forte.

If that data is meant to bolster the argument that a 200 is "safer" than a rav4, it is one hell of a generalization.

Yes, a ford excursion is likely to win a tangle with a yaris.. but it is also going to be far less likely to be able to avoid the accident in the first place.

 

[40Man]

Per accident or mile driven?

Plus, a quote from the IIHS study:
"Bigger vehicles provide greater protection," Cicchino says. "If you're riding in one of the smallest vehicles on the road, you'll be at a disadvantage in a crash with almost any other vehicle around you."

The "bigger vehicle" providing factual data in their test was a toyota avalon or kia sorento. Aka a competitor to the rav4. The "smallest vehicle on the road" in their test was a yaris ia and a kia forte.

If that data is meant to bolster the argument that a 200 is "safer" than a rav4, it is one hell of a generalization.

Yes, a ford excursion is likely to win a tangle with a yaris.. but it is also going to be far less likely to be able to avoid the accident in the first place.

The link also has another link with graphs to show likelihood of death based on car size.

Again, on average larger cars are safer, as most accidents are with other cars or animals, but even single car accident data shows largers cars are safer. It isn't a debate.

"Improvements in crash protection have made vehicles of all sizes safer, but bigger vehicles are still safer than smaller ones even with those improvements."

 

[coleAK]

IIHS data factually shows lighter vehicles lead to higher death rates, as the link I posted above shows.

IIHS death rates. The largest truck ram 2500 they have data on vs a RAV4. RAV4 has a much lower single and multiple vehicle death rate.

 

[hdj8081]

Im at it. I used my 16 200 for safety issue. Very stable LA to florida. Who cares about gas. Its smiles per gallon

 

[40Man]

IIHS death rates. The largest truck ram 2500 they have data on vs a RAV4. RAV4 has a much lower single and multiple vehicle death rate.

View attachment 2716917

View attachment 2716918

Yes, there are other factors, like crash test rating of the vehicle in class, rollover risk, etc., but statistics clearly show large cars and SUVs are safer than small to mid-size cars and SUVs.

But the largest SUVs (Suburban, Denali) have super low death rates. Trucks can be dangerous due to traction, manuevering and rollovers that a light bed can exacerbate (rollover risk was a good increase in the Ram deaths).

 

[bloc]

Again, per accident, or mile driven?

 

[tacoduck]

Yes, there are other factors, like crash test rating of the vehicle in class, rollover risk, etc., but statistics clearly show large cars and SUVs are safer than small to mid-size cars and SUVs.

But the largest SUVs (Suburban, Denali) have suler low death rates. Trucks can be dangerous due to traction, manuevering and rollovers that a light bed can exacerbate (rollover risk was a good increase in the Ram deaths).

Laws of Physics Persist: In Crashes, Big Cars Win

New tests confirm that in a head-to-head collision, it’s better to be in the big car.

www.technologyreview.com

Big cars are safer than small cars. Also, I can think of 5 times in the past year on mud where someone was parked at a stoplight and got rear ended by another car. In each case the 200 drove away. Would the same be true in a rav4?

 

[VAPny54]

I recently did a XC road trip in the 200 series (VA - Utah) which totaled 7,702 miles across 1 month. My total cost for fuel was $1700 which actually came under the $2,000 I originally budgeted.

If fuel cost is no issue, the 200 is your option unless you want to spend time getting used to the Rav4 which would be a good warm-up / break-in period.

Silver lining - my 200 was more efficient than I thought

 

[linuxgod]

Funny you're going from Seattle to Chicago... I'm driving from Chicago to Seattle. Family of 5 and we *are* stopping at national parks along the way. We're also towing a trailer, and our second car is a Mini Cooper, so there's no choice for us.

For you it's really a question of "comfort vs MPG/environmental impact".

Having done a number of long trips across the country (albeit with the trailer in tow) I would take the LC. It's a nicer ride, quieter, more spacious, etc for the family.