When Toyota redesigned its compact RAV4 SUV in 2006, it was, all of a sudden, not so compact anymore. Its new dimensions put it into close competition with the first-generation Highlander being sold alongside it - so it was clear a new Highlander was on its way - but when? A partial answer came earlier this year at the Chicago Auto Show when the 2008 Highlander was revealed, but this new model never made it to the Canadian auto show circuit. That makes the preproduction hybrid version that Toyota brought to Ottawa for the launch of its cross-country Hybrid Tour, the first 2008 Highlander to make it onto Canadian soil for public viewing. Not that there was much wrong with the original Highlander (aside from its lack of personality), but this new one appears to be a big improvement over the first-gen model. Most notably, it's much larger, both physically and visually, with attractive, if not particularly distinctive, styling compared to competitors in the rapidly ballooning mid-size crossover class. Toyota wasn't letting journalists drive this preproduction car, but encouraged journalists and the public alike to poke around in it as much as we liked. Read Full Article
Does anyone know if the HiHy for 2008 will include any options for a 4-cyl ICE....something that will really optimize fuel efficiency for this vehicle (which it sounds like is getting larger)? Just curious...I'm hoping one day to "upgrade" to a seven or eight passenger hybrid vehicle that is optimized for efficiency, not performance. So far, I don't think it exists. Thanks! [email protected]
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mikeslavis @ Jun 13 2007, 01:19 AM) [snapback]460690[/snapback]</div> I shuttered at the word 'upgrade'. A SUV isn't an 'upgrade' from a sedan, it is just a different vehicle - usually less safe (for occupants and outsiders), more environmentally damaging, with a higher sales margin, but with more room (and there a few families that need the more room, though I recommend looking at minivans for their better efficiency and safety). Aside from that, I was wondering about its efficiency/performance trade off too. It would be nice to see what kind of mileage it will get.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MarkMN @ Jun 13 2007, 11:34 AM) [snapback]460924[/snapback]</div> The mileage is only going to be about the same. The new version is something like 500 pounds heavier. They made the ICE/engine a bit more efficient, but that just offsets the additional weight. Here's the press release...see page 3 of the pdf... http://www.toyota.com/vehicles/minisite/highlander/pr.pdf Too bad.
One thing I am beginning to wonder about is the continual growing size of motor vehicles in this day and age. There's only two companies you can buy a compact pickup truck from: Ford and Mazda - they're essentially the same vehicle. I'm beginning to believe less and less that it's the consumer's demands.
My dad has a 1986 Toyota SR5 Xtra Cab truck. It's got low milage and is in great condition. I wish Toyota still sold trucks like this, I remember he paid about 13k for it new in 1986. Now the trucks on the Toyota lot are HUGE, way too big for what I need. And the new Corolla is getting bigger for 2008 as well, it will be bigger than the 2008 Prius. I agree, we don't need more big cars. Dave
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mikeslavis @ Jun 13 2007, 01:19 AM) [snapback]460690[/snapback]</div> No, there will be no 4cyl Highlander of any type for 2008. There is no 4cyl for the current version either and the new one is a wopping 500lbs heavier so it is not a canidate for a 4. The old one could have been made with a large 4cyl and do ok. The only contender currently for you is the Ford Escape Hybrid, it gets great mpg for an SUV. (please don't go off on me comparing it to the Highlander, I know its in a different class)
I never liked the body style of the old Highlander. This one looks even worse. Looks like a misshapen jelly bean. Just my personal opinion of course.
Edmunds review: http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/...icleId=121374#2 Good looking but Disappointing mpg.
28.6mpg in ECON mode without really trying is pretty good for a review drive. I bet people that try and drive for FE will be seeing 35 or so.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ozyran @ Jun 13 2007, 11:18 PM) [snapback]461325[/snapback]</div> And the design is two decades old. Minor upgrades only since then. Its a nice size and usefull truck I just wish it was updated to be more competitive <BUT NOT LARGER!!!>.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Jun 26 2007, 01:28 AM) [snapback]468117[/snapback]</div> I'm surprise you say that considering, it's rare any1 can beat the EPA estimates.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MickeyA @ Jun 25 2007, 10:44 PM) [snapback]468128[/snapback]</div> I just matched Transport Canada's rating of 4.0L/100km (58.8mpg). 3.9L/100km would be your old EPA rating of 60mpg and I'm in a hilly area!
