[TheDarkKnight]

ECVT much better on Toyota

Subjective, not fact.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

Everything is subjective. I could understand Honda decision if CR-V had I-VTM on board. Without that why not do rear by wire?

You made the claim that Toyota's e-CVT was better. It isnt.

As a CR-V PHEV owner, and have extensively driven the plug in variant of the RAV4 here - the Toyota was massively inferior in terms of responsiveness, agility and handling. Appreciate those are my own experiences and not empirical, but the RAV4 is seriously long in the tooth and it shows.

CR-V PHEV is in another league altogether and even smashes the Lexus NX Plug In out the park too.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

Have you watched that video (13 min a series of wet clutches) ?
4 wheels apply more stress on transmission than 2 wheels (Rav 4 has trans connected to front wheels and back wheels to eclectic motor with driving by wire) - less stress - longer lifespan + better mpg. Also, if there is a rear deferential than why it has no i-vtm4?

Word salad.

Also, when I tested the RAV4 plug in, its fuel economy and performance were a joke. I got better MPG out of my retired 1.5T 5G CR-V.

And now with my current CR-V PHEV (admittedly 2WD), its returning over 90mpg on urban runs and over 70mpg on the motorway/freeway.

Your advocacy of the RAV4 is well recieved, but it is outdated and hideously inferior.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

I like your enthusiasm.

I'm talking established facts.

You've provided none for the CR-V, which I guess from your musings, you havent tested thoroughly, if at all - yet with the same breath, you claim the RAV4 is better at MPG etc etc....

That sir is bias, not fact.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

Given that the OP to this thread hasnt returned, its now locked. Cheers.