Before we picked out the Matrix - we were hitting the RAV4 market pretty hard. From what I gather from some research - some 2001-2002 RAV4 and 2001-2003 Highlanders had issues with ECM/PCM programming logic firing the CEL off for no reason and harsh shifting of the TCM/PCM (TSB #00206). I know there was a ECM reflash procedure (probably what they are talking about) to correct them - or it is possible that they tried to reflash the computer and accidentally "bricked" it, prompting them to replace it.

My girlfriends 2002 RAV4 Le had shifting problems last week...just before the warranty expired. She took it to the dealer and the 'replaced the computer' and now its fine. I don't know if it was the ECM computer that they replaced since I haven't seen the work order yet. Has anyone else had tranny/ecm problems in their RAV4?

How many people have a RAV4??

 

There aren't as many RAV4s on the road as there are Camrys or Corollas, but they sell a fair number of them.

My Mom bought a 2003 RAV4 Limited 4WD in late 2002. She drove it for 30 months and put 27k miles on it. It never had any issues, not even a squeak or rattle. I was not aware that there were any common problems with the RAV4. Based on my Mom's experience with hers, I was ready to get one in 2005. I thought about it twice and just couldn't see myself driving a SUV by myself all the time even if it was a small one like the RAV4.

My personal opinion was that the 2003 RAV4 was the best one they built in terms of styling. Later models don't have the right combination of aggressiveness and crispness. Not to mention that the redesign making it longer, heavier and the V6 option completely changed the character of the vehicle and it is no longer something I'm interested in.

I always thought the Rav4 Looked unstable and would tip over too easily.

Looks can be quite deceiving. While the RAV4 may look unstable, I can assure you that it is not.

I frequently drove the AWD RAV4 at twice the suggested speed on curves, only 5 or 10 mph slower than I would attempt the same curves at in my Contour or Corolla and the RAV4 never had that much body roll, let alone enough to get the car on two wheels.

Compare it to a Supra or MR2 and yes it seems unstable.

Compare it to a Camry or Corolla and you won't notice much of a difference.

Compare it to a 1998-2002 Ford Explorer and you'll feel like the RAV4 is glued to the road.

I always thought the lower the car to the ground (and the wider the wheels are spaced apart), the greater the road stability.The taller vehicles seem to tip easier and the Rav4 looks taller than the typical sedan.

The center of gravity of an object is determined by its center of mass and that is what determines rollover resistance (mostly). Since the engine and transmission are the heaviest things in the car and they are mounted low in a RAV4, it has a low center of gravity, despite the fact that it is taller than a typical sedan. Height has less to do with stability if the car is engineered properly. That being said, a poorly engineered car will be far less stable the taller it gets.

Remember that looks can be deceiving.

The 2007 RAV4 has a static rollover rating of 4 stars, which is among the best for SUVs.

The 2007 Ford Explorer has a static rollover rating of 3 stars despite the fact that it is wider an no taller than a RAV4.