I am comparing these two vehicles, and here are my observations so far:

Outlander
I like the style better
Better stereo
Leather interior
Better off road (can anyone confirm this?)
10 year warranty

Toyota
Better engine (more fuel efficient)
More powerful (faster in the 0-60 and 45-60)
Better resale value.

What are your thougts on my observations, and has anyone test driven the two?

 

what answer do you expect in Outlander forum?

Besides being more powerful with slightly more efficient engine Rav4 is crappy in other aspects. Looks, features, warranty...

Also, unless you don't plan to keep Outlander for long, no worries about resale value

 

I doubt the 2GR-FE in the RAV4 is more fuel efficient. I have the same one with direct injection (2GR-FSE which claims to use less fuel) and its averaging 16 L/100km compared to the Outlander at around 12 L/100km max (probably even less for an `10). The RAV4 has 5 gears vs 6 in the Outlander, so that hurts fuel economy too on the highway. The RAV4 is faster in straight line, but the Outlander is better in slalom tests (especially with S-AWC).
The Outlander has a better AWD system (especially if you get GT in the US or XLS elsewhere, which has S-AWC with an active front differential and torque vectoring). The RAV4 is just reactive with 100% FWD until slip is detected...so even the regular AWC is better than that.
The Outlander has a firmer suspension and less body roll, while the RAV4 is a bit plushier. The Outlander feels more confident in corners and has a better steering feel, wile the RAV4 has the legandary Toyota electric power steering and no road feel whatsoever. The Outlander is way better for anybody who actually enjoys driving. The Outlander with S-AWC also helps you take corners faster, since it gives torque to the outside wheels when it detects you are taking a turn fast.
Both are bad off road, as any unibody CUV has limited suspension travel.

RAV4 has a better resale value, but not by much, at least here. It also costs more initially and you get less features for your money. I would personally get a Highlander base V6 compared to a RAV4 fully loaded, since the price difference is minimal but the quality and materials are way better. Likewise, it has a better AWD system and a number of standard features not on the RAV4.

Keep in mind the RAV4 has a side opening tailgate, while the Outlander has dual vertial ones.

That's what I remember from comparing the two. I was looking for a RAV4/CRV first, but didn't like them at all compared to the Outlander.

I'm sure the RAV4 has some things the Outlander doesn't and vise versa, but I can't remember anything from looking at the RAV4.

 

You are probably right about the highlander vs the fully loaded rav 4. But how would you compare the highlander to the outlander? Im guessing the outlander is still more fun to drive. So Ivanz i'm guessing you went and bought an outlander afterall? What was the deciding factor for you between the highlander and the outlander?

 

I bought a used 08 LS V6 4WD a couple months back. I have not tested the Highlander at all since I did not look for a top of the line RAV4 at the time.
The Highlander is a class above the Outlander, as its a more of SUV than a CUV (although it is unibody as well). It has worse handling than the RAV4 (at least in slalom tests), but it is bigger and more refined. Also, it just has that better quality, design, and materials that put it a class above. I've only seen it and not driven it though, so I can't say for sure. The Highlander will be a bit better off road (more suspension travel but still unibody)...it should also feel better on the roads in terms of bumps (but not handling).

Overall, it depends on what you are looking for in such a car. Are you doing mostly city driving? highway? dirt/gravel roads? Is cargo area important? You will be the one driving it daily, so its really up to you which car is the right one. If you wake up each morning and say "Why did I buy this piece of junk?" then no matter how highly it was rated or recommended, it just isn't the car for you.

 

When I was shopping around last September I test drove Rav4 and the Outlander. Let me also say that I was driving a Toyota for 4 years before I got the Outlander. I will tackle another aspect of comparison between these two cars and makes; perception and feel.

While Toyota has a better resale value, while Toyota is perceived as a more reliable car in general, I got to say that the appeal that you get with a Toyota is nowhere close to the Outlander.

Toyota has no spirit and no character. Drive around and you will see people from on their mid 40s to late 70s driving Toyota. My point-->There is no clear appeal and perception in driving a Toyota. This brand has a very high average age drivers compared to Mitsu.

Going around saying I drive a Toyota, unless it's a supra, might as well say I take the bus. Toyota is a boring car and every person who is looking for excitement while driving his/her car will tell you this after driving it.

It is clear that I got my bias on this comment due to what I look for and the stage of life that I am now but I must say that if you're looking for a fun drive and for a car that won't get boring 3 months from now, stay away from Toyota cause it is exactly the opposite of that.
On the other hand, if you don't care about all of the above and you just want a reliable car that will bring you to work and back home, then Toyota is definitely a good choice.

 

when i went out to get the outlander i was also looking at the rav4 and the crv at the time
but went for the outlander because of the amazing warranty 10 years power train, can't really beat that and that i didnt really care about the resale value as i would keep the car until it breaks
pretty much and for the price and features i got in the outlander as apposed to the rav4 and crv it was worth it

i was looking at base models for rav4 and crv and the ls v6 model for the outlander and the outlander was well cheaper than the others

 

Resale is very location dependant. Here, for example, an 08 Outlander XLS goes for the same price as the top of the line 08 RAV4 ($29,000 +/- $1,000). I personally do plan to keep it as long as possible, even though the 10 year warranty is fully transferrable here (unlike in the US).

 

It's so hard to choose a new vehicle. I think you guys are right about the Toyota. It is boring, and can't match the warranty. Just was worried about missing out on the extra power the v6 might have had. Now I'm looking at the Jeeps too, Patriot and Liberty. Patriot is about 10000 cheaper for a 4wd! I'm trading in my 2006 Kia Rio, because it would be really nice for the winter up here. And also the entry level 4wd outlander in canada comes to 29,698, which is pretty steep. For not much more, you could get a BMW! I really love the design and I bet it drives real sporty. I'll have to take it for a test drive before I rule it out.

 

I don't know what is your exact price range but I would definitely stay away from Jeeps. Patriot/Compass/Libery have as much offroad capability as Rav4/Outlander which is pretty much limited to gravel/muddy roads, none of them are good offroaders, plus with Jeeps, reliability is always an issue.

I was also comparing Rav4/CRV/Forester before I got my hands on a 2009 Outlander ES 4WD. Price wise neither Toyota/Honda came close. Driving wise Outlander seems to like to be thrown around the corners the most, it's just fun, doesn't feel numb/generic. Also, little details such as the flap/fold tailgate, dual glove boxes, European styling, and unmatched features/pricing persuaded me to get the Outlander. The 2.4l engine is adequate, I was thinking of getting the 3.0l but here in NJ powerful cars are not the greatest idea, no point of spending extra money if you can't really take advantage of it, crappy roads and cops everywhere. Plus with the 2.4l I am easily hitting 27-30 mpg mark on highway. Also, the difference in torque between the 2.4l and 3.0l is like 30, and the 3.0l is also a heavier engine.

Anyway, I am not a hardcore car enthusiast but I do like to play with numbers and Outlander just made the most sense.