If I didn’t know better, I’d bet carmakers choose model names via a Google simulation. A computer identifies search words that can be punted to page four within days of launch. In this case, it’s only a matter of a week or so before lornezovenza.com and Jac Venza slip into double digit obscurity. At the same time, I suppose Toyota settled on “Venza” because it sounds vaguely Italian– perfect for a car built in Georgetown Kentucky on a Camry platform. In truth, I don’t know what it is: the word, the car, the point. All I know is after spending time in the new Toyota Venza I’ve become a cautious and reluctant fan.
The Toyota Venza is either a jacked-up touring car or scaled down SUV. Depends on what you’re getting out of. Built on a Camry platform, it rides awfully high for a sedan. It can be crossed-shopped with a zillion cross-overs. Toyota put it in the ‘car’ section of its Web site.
Your opinion of just what the Venza is changes on angle of approach. From the front, it’s a Camry with edema. I actually walked passed my tester without noticing it tucked between other Toyotas. From the side it’s a Highlander with a couple yards of cargo space sliced off. The back is distinctive, swoopy but strong. You’d think something this unique wouldn’t come off so bland. And you’d be wrong.
On the inside, the engineers did much better. The interior swirls around the driver and passenger. It’s modern without being show car crazy. It’s dramatic without gimmickry. Gauges are centered, large and multicolored. The gear selector pops out of a plunging dash, putting the shifter and steering wheel racecar close.
Never having been in the car before, I immediately knew where all the functional gizmos were and how to work them. As for other things, like your iPod or sunglasses, write yourself a note. There are so many trap doors and secret compartments second owners are guaranteed a new flash light or breath mints on delivery.
There is no cruel third row seat. For this, the car gets an extra star. There is a curved rear roofline, with a cost of 12 cubic feet of cargo capacity. Star gone. Nice NC-17 back seats, though. You could drive your adults friends to a movie and not feel shame.
Our test Venza was a well-equipped, V6, all-wheel drive version. In an affable departure for Toyota, there are no arcane trim levels to confuse and bemuse. Pick front or four wheels to power from four or six cylinders. Option packages are the usual value meal menu that inevitably leaves me feeling like I could’ve made a better deal. Overall, Toyota made this easier to buy than other Toyotas or competitors.
Toyota’s 3.5-liter double overhead cam 24-valve dual VVT-i V6 reportedly makes 268 hp and 246 lb.-ft. of torque. The engine revs up quickly, with icy calm. A loaded Venza’s got 600 pounds on the Camry, though. After two entrance ramps you want to drive this to Weight Watchers. The 2.7-liter four won’t be available for another month. Dropping down 80 horses won’t be fun. Still, 2.7 is pretty fat for a four, promising 20 percent improvement in mileage. We’ll check back.
The six-speed electronically controlled automatic overdrive transmission with intelligence and sequential shift mode is the perfect servant. Competent and unobtrusive. The drive train is so enthusiastic, its easy to think the Venza might be thrashable. Don’t kid yourself.
Handling off-track, in normal conditions, this is a porky wagon on 20” wheels. It does ride lower than typical SUVs, or most current crossovers, and the center of gravity is beneath any minivan. When it’s tight – or more appropriately – in an emergency ball-in-the-street dodge, it keeps its composure. As the 4,000 pounds list, you’re reminded that lower would be better.
In not making a more traditional Camry wagon, Toyota gave in to prevailing misconceptions that higher is safer. The opposite is true. The Camry handles better and Venza’s extra inches aren’t enough for the driver to see over the Escalade in front. Lose, lose. Toyota compensates with electronics. It’s not fully effective.
I did test the electronic nannies, though. Luckily for you – not me – I had some seat time in a disgusting frozen rainstorm. The brakes (Anti-lock Brake System with Electronic Brake-force Distribution and Brake Assist) are exceptional. The all wheel drive, traction control and stability control performed admirably. In fact, the whole safety package prevented me from doing stupid things in the name of journalism. The car is a mom.
That realization reshaped my opinion of the Venza. It’s not perfect, but that’s because, like many moms, it’s trying to balance so much. It’s a pack of compromises, but: It carries more peat moss than a Camry, parks easier than a Highlander, seems more mature than a RAV 4, more svelte than a Seinna. No, it can’t perform butch SUV stunts. Why should it? That’s not what the Venza’s about. The riddle of the Venza is not what it is, but what it does. It does a lot. For a lot of people, that’s everything.
Well, it sounds like Toyota will have no trouble selling these. I would be really impressed if they did some sort of take on the Audi Allroad or Subie Outback. Oh, well. Thanks for the vanilla.
I really wish one of these guys (Honda, Toy, Nissan) would just make a traditional wagon. If Honda or Toyota would make an attractive wagon out of the Camry or Accord with some sort of a tag line that said, “Look, this just makes sense.” Most people would buy it! Because Honda or Toyota said so! The time is right – people are beginning to get of SUVs – and Toyota, Honda, and even Nissan, are perfectly poised to bring the wagon back. Pull the trigger.
Pricey – I see your tester was almost $35K. MSRP in the DC area for a V6 FWD is a scary (to these cheap eyes) $33k w/shipping, because the current base configuration has leather/heated seating + JBL audio. The 4-cyl starts at $5K less.
I liked the cheerleaders better, but those are really cute pooches. If only it handled like a Nissan instead of a Toyota, I’d seriously consider it. Wagons rock.
Wagons from all manufacturers are prevalent in Europe. It is more convincing them that Americans will buy wagons, or is it convincing Americans to buy wagons.
I note that the previous Mazda 6 had a Sedan/Hatch/Wagon, but the new model now only has a sedan. That would lead me to assume that Wagons still don’t interest most Americans.
I won’t buy a sedan, the only reason I will pass on a hatch is to get a good sports coupe or convertible.
Bring back wagons, and buy them…
Never having been in the car before, I immediately knew where all the functional gizmos were and how to work them
I’m currently shopping for family vehicles and, I have to say, Toyota gets this right more often than anyone else. Cars like the Sienna or Camry may not be pretty, and the interiors might be basic, if not a little chintzy, but the ergonomics are spot on. Buttons and knobs are big, well-placed, topographically distinct and clearly labeled.
Yes, they look either geriatric-medicine-bottle huge or Walmart-stereo cheesy, but damn, do they work well. I figured out a Sienna without even trying; a Flex or Oddy requires a few minutes of study, while an Accord is a disaster next to a Camry.
Handling off-track, in normal conditions, this is a porky wagon on 20” wheels. It does irde lower than typical SUVs, or most current crossovers, and the center of gravity is beneath any minivan. When it’s tight – or more appropriately – in an emergency ball-in-the-street dodge, it keeps its composure. As the 4,000 pounds list, you’re reminded that lower would be better.
irde?
Four thousand pounds is just slightly less than a Sienna CE. That’s a lot of mass for something much smaller and much more compromised. If you’re buying this to be sporty, you’re an idiot, or at least grossly misguided. It’s a Toyota. See Mazda for a CX-7 if sporty is your thing.
If you’re buying it for it’s looks, well, that’s fine. Just expect some ribbing from people who know better.
One compromise this car makes are those massive wheels. Too many cars (Flex, Edge, ahem!) compromise passenger space and, frankly, price for a set of big rims. The Sienna makes do with 16″ and probably manages a better turning radius, better ride and–this is important–much cheaper rubber. If you live in eastern Canada or the northeast US, have you priced eighteen-inch snows recently?
Do smaller wheels look a little dorky? Yes. Can you live with dorky when stylish costs an extra four hundred dollars per tire? I can.
Toyota’s 3.5-liter double overhead cam 24-valve dual VVT-i V6 reportedly makes 268 hp and 246 lb.-ft. of torque. The engine revs up quickly, with icy calm.
This is a terrific engine. It sounds very good, much better than the tax-like noises from the GM HFV 3.6 or the Duratec 3.7. Better than Honda’s 3.5L, too. It gets good mileage and, wow, is it strong.
That said, this engine hauls the Sienna and Highlander around seriously quickly, and the RAV alarmingly so. If we weren’t spoiled by the near-sub-six-seconds it can turn in the Camry, I’d say it’s overkill. Heck, it is overkill: the old 2.4L four was plenty strong; the 2.7L can only be better.
Pricey – I see your tester was almost $35K. MSRP in the DC area for a V6 FWD is a scary (to these cheap eyes) $33k w/shipping, because the current base configuration has leather/heated seating + JBL audio.
Then again, it just became a little harder to think about paying that kind of money or more for a Volvo V70.
19″ wheels are standard and there is a 20″ donk option? Anyone else phased by this?
Actually a nice review. Toyota can do a nice intuitive interior. I still wish the reviews were more about mechanicals than interiors.
I once dated a girl named Irde. She had a thick accent and a low hairline.
Toyota: Just give us a regular Camry wagon, one that is 400 lbs lighter than this pig.
Toyota claims that Venza comes from adVENture and MonZA (the Italian race track) but personally I think it comes from the Chevrolet Venture and Monza
19s standard and 20 optional?!
Do the 20s come with a 400W sub-wolfer and collection of rap MP3s?
@Bytor: read somewhere that Mazda sold just a couple hundred Mazda6 wagons per month, lots of those to fleets.
First of all, this thing looks just like a FORD EDGE.
Secondly, special seat covers should be offered as an option for animals to ride in cars.
First of all, this thing looks just like a FORD EDGE.
True, but I think the front grille looks vaguely Chryslerish (aack!).
John
the Edge was the primary target for toyota and i agree they look similar. regarding the height, i am confident that the engineers at toyota realize that lower cog is better than higher; they very intentionally set the height to make it easy to get in and out of this vehicle. they even attached sensors to the muscles of people getting in and out of test cars to determine the optimum seat height. they are targeting baby boomers and young families and esp. those with dogs. this car is going to do really well because of very clever and on the money market positioning. AND serve as yet ANOTHER example of why GM is in the toilet and toyota is making profits even in a very down year.
“I would be really impressed if they did some sort of take on the Audi Allroad or Subie Outback.”
John b,
why Toyota would be killing its own Outback? Toyota wants to make sure that outback sells well! Also, Venza is much larger then Outback with comfort in the back.
Guys, the 20 inchers are standard on V6 and I4 gets 19” standard. To me this is the single bad part of this car. These tires are performance and have no treadwear warranty and to replace 4 x19” will cost about $850. These tires might wear out in 2-3 years. This is departs Toyota’s practicality doctrine.
As looks go, to me it looks like Avalon in the nose and Volvo in the back.
This does look a lot like the Edge in the front end. The grill looks like a total rip-off from the Edge, except the Edge grill looks better. I also see some Mazda CX-9 in the roof and rear end.
With the taillights beeing ripped off the Volvo XC90.
20″ rims?
?
Or maybe they just copied botht he MAZDA and the EDGE…
This isn’t the first design Toyota has stolen.
Toyota: Just give us a regular Camry wagon, one that is 400 lbs lighter than this pig.
Wagons do not sell in North America.
Read it again. Post it atop your monitor. Try as we might, they just don’t move. They never really have, even before the SUV.
Manufacturers are partially complicit in this: they realized some time ago that, while consumers will not pay thousands more for a wagon version of a mainstream sedan, they will cough up dollars for the same wagon with a different nameplate and six to eight inches of additional ride height.
Personally, I’ll take a low-floor crossover or minivan over a wagon any day. The tall roof and low load floor are much more effective uses of space; you end up with something that weighs only slightly more, takes up less curbside space and holds much, much more. I’ll agree that high-floor crossovers and SUVs are silly, but if you want to see the modern full-size wagon, look to the minivan.
So what’s the “sell?” Every automaker has some kind of F-AWD sedan/wagon/CUV thing. (F-AWD: adj., Fake AWD, a front-drive car with a driveshaft stuck in the transaxle for advertising purposes.) If this is supposed to compete with the Ford Edge, I still see no point because no one wants the Edge, even if it did further disgrace the latest James Bond movie. I suppose if the D3 go down it will sell because there would simply be less cars on sale, once again making Toyota a default winner.
Oh yay – another Camry on stilts. Just what the world needs. Toyota must be taking notes from Ford’s “let’s stuff too many entries into a crowded segment” playbook, and evidently ripped off the Edge – which looks better BTW.
Something’s gotta die give.
Wagons do not sell in North America.
I don’t think this trend is reversing either. Subaru axed the Legacy wagon, Mazda the 6 wagon. Who still does honest wagons? Only BMW and Audi, but they are priced out of mainstream.
I like the direction the Venza is going, trying to wean American tastes back to the practical wagon format. Get a Venza and drop it 2-3″ with aftermarket springs… That’s what I would do. But those 20″ tires are going to be expensive to replace.
Fake AWD, a front-drive car with a driveshaft stuck in the transaxle for advertising purposes
Truthfully, when paired with stability control and decent tires, that’s enough AWD for most people’s needs (eg, getting out of their driveway). If you need more, you’re likely either rallying or pushing a snowplow.
Debating about Haldex vs. SH-AWD vs. Quattro vs. Whatever Subaru uses is really rather pointless for most people, and certainly those buying a tall Camry.
Wagons do not sell in North America.Well, not since Chrysler introduced the minivan in 1983 they haven’t. Before then, the prototypical ‘Wagon Queen Family Trucksters’ from Vacation sold well enough to keep them in production.
Now, with the minivan ‘mommy-mobile’ stigma having wiped out that market, and the impracticality and poor fuel economy of the SUV doing that one in, the manufacturers have to come up with the latest version of the ‘non-wagon wagon’. As is usually the case, Toyota seems to have done a decent job of it with the Venza which is, for all intents and purposes, just a tall Camry wagon with a slightly higher center of gravity and sloping rear window.
It’s unfortunate that the original size of that two-box ’83 Chrysler has fallen so far by the wayside. To this day, it remains the pinnacle of the practical, small, family people mover.
Wagon’s don’t sell because they are ugly.
However, look what DOES sell…
Crossovers – SUV space built onto a car frame
There are some ugly crossovers that look just like wagons, but, the trend for the next 10 years will be Crossovers with high fuel efficiency.
Great review Michael – it would have been too easy to go the “it’s boring and doesn’t drive like a BMW” route on this one. Yes it is boring and is not engineered to be pushed hard but that is not the point – this is what Toyota does best – inoffensive, comfortable, utilitarian family transportation. And it seems to sell well.
I don’t think this trend is reversing either. Subaru axed the Legacy wagon, Mazda the 6 wagon. Who still does honest wagons? Only BMW and Audi, but they are priced out of mainstream.
Yes, but those are all small wagons–especially the BMW, which is more a glorified hatch than a real wagon–at least by the Buick Roadmaster/Chevy Caprice/Ford Crown Vic standard. Heck, they’re smaller than compact wagonoids like the old Aspen/Volare. They’re heavier, yes, but not quite so roomy. And they’re up against modern child-seat regs.
It’s those same land-yacht wagons that the minivans have displaced. And with good reason: a minivan is a better choice, for most people, more often.
Think about the Magnum: longer than Sienna or Caravan, got worse mileage, fit less people and stuff and didn’t handle or drive better for 95% of the driving public. Even the Volvo V70–the last real wagon left–loses a lot of practical space to, say, a Mazda5 or Kia Rondo.
personally, I really wish that Ford would keep the Taurus x, rename it Explorer and refine the damn thing. It only makes sense. It is a very good first try. The Flex should go as should the current Explorer. Refined, it would give this thing a run for the money. I’m normally a Honda fan boy, but in this segment I really like the Taurus X.
Wagons from all manufacturers are prevalent in Europe. It is more convincing them that Americans will buy wagons, or is it convincing Americans to buy wagons.
I just caught this comment. I think there’s an important distinction to make here:
* Wagons and hatches in Europe are more prevalent than sedans.
* MPVs/Versos/Crossovers/Space-wagons are gaining traction in both markets against both traditional wagons and sedans. Look at stuff like the B-Class, Golf Plus, Meriva, C-Max and such.
The low-roofer is dead.
Why hello, dogs.
I’m only buying this if they come with it.
I saw one of these in person about a week ago and had a chance to poke around inside. I currently have an 07 GTI and an 05 MINI Cooper S. I really, really, really want one of these with a hybrid powertrain. Give me AWD (electric motors on the rear wheels, like the highlander) and the 2.7L instead of the V6, and that would be my perfect travel vehicle. It would surely get better fuel economy than my GTI and MINI plus being larger and more comforable on those 4 hr trips over the mountains to my family’s place.
The back seats of the Venza are epic. Tons of leg room and the seats recline. Plus, they automatically lay down flat with a quick pull of the handle located within reach from the hatch. This car is full of clever little features that have me smitten.
Still no adequate Malibu Maxx relpacement: $10k more expensive and 3 MPG thirstier. Much bigger, yes, but that’s not necessarily what I’m after.
The Subie Outback is too expensive and thirsty. And cramped inside.
The Elantra Touring is on the way, but probably too small.
Passat Wagon? Surely you jest.
An Altima Wagon would own. Too bad it doesn’t exist.
I have a feeling I’ll be hanging onto my Maxx till the year 2025 or so.
This thing looks a lot like the Ford Edge or it’s Lincoln counterpart. Maybe a little more swoopy, but still bland and uninspiring.
So, I checked the dimensions on the thing. It is the same length, width, wheelbase, and ground clearance as the Highlander, although it is 6 inches shorter, and has 25 cu ft less cargo space.
All Toyotas are appliances, and these ones are more utilitarian than most. Comparisons of performance are quite besides the point. To my mind the RAV4 delivers more utility per dollar than either the Venza or the Highlander. In particular, the RAV4 with a 4 cyl engine is just plain a more attractive economic proposition. (We own one, I bought it for my wife performance is satisfactory for her and acceptable to me although I prefer my V6 Accord).
We bought the RAV4 to replace her 10 year old minivan, which was too big now that our baby is 21, and not economical to operate. I don’t the think the Venza would have been considered.
Yuck!!!
The grill looks like a Ford and not sure why they built this car. For Who?
I never like Toyota.
Dogs in the car?
Whatever seat cover you put if your dog wants to chew on them there is no way of stopping them except if you want to cook them for dinner.
All Toyotas are appliances, and these ones are more utilitarian than most. Comparisons of performance are quite besides the point. To my mind the RAV4 delivers more utility per dollar than either the Venza or the Highlander.
Unless Toyota is expecting to own the truck market once one or more of the Detroit makes contract or disappear, they have a real problem here. Their car lineup is eminently rational, but their trucks are nuts.
Either, this, the Highlander or the RAV are going to have to go. My bet is one the Highlander: the RAV and Sienna are better soft-roaders, the 4Runner a real truck, the Sequoia cheap as dirt to produce. That leaves the “too cool for a Camry or Sienna and too practical for a real truck” crowd the Venza.
I’d bet the xB is next. Between the Matrix and RAV, it’s got to be suffering, too.
Came up behind one on the expressway last week. Liked what I saw, save for two errors, one at each end. Toyota logo was clear on the back gate as was, more importantly, Toyota/Lexus design language in the creased rear quarter panels and taillights. “Hmm,” I thought, “a Camry-based CUV and sort of a Toyota version of the Lexus RX. (Yes I know about Toyota Harriers.) Looks good, but what’s it called?” Unfortunately, I got as close as I could at 60+ mph but still could not read the model name across the back. (Had to find it on Toyota’s website when I got home.) Subtle badging is good: illegibile is not.
Also really liked the profile as I drove alongside, but lost it when I saw the grille in my rearview mirror. Prior description as Avalon-like is generous. All but ruined it for me. Don’t love the nose blister either (probably due in part to such a lovely description) but at least it’s a consistent design cue.
So Dear Toyota: 1. Fix the Venza lettering on the back and give yourself a fighting chance with drive-by customers, and 2. asap, send your plan-B (and C) grille designs to aftermarket manufacturers so they can get some out while you redesign it for next year. Other than that, I think you’ve got a winner here.
Wagons sell just fine here when the layout and interior volume is good. Take for example the original xB, the Fit, and the Mazda5.
Yes, these are “tall” wagons, but even if squashed them down, they wouldn’t suffer from the idiotic, cargo-space robbing CUV curve of the Venza (and many many others).
You make a wagon with a proper layout at a good price, and it will sell. This is a glorified, expensive attempt at a wagon, and it doesn’t look like it succeeds in the area most important to a wagon buyer: cargo space.
For that, and the larger SUV/CUV poseur issues, it’s another reason you should keep your old Volvo wagon.
This car is incredible I drove one in LA. Its the perfect compromise for what average people and families need today, and the 20s imbue it with a great sense of style. I wanted to hate this thing because it had no reason for being but i saw a black one roll up on dubs, I got in and loved it. Take every hatchback, sports car, sports sedan, SUV, available, average them all out and you get the Venza: a quality, high-riding, stylish wagon-thing.
It’s amazing really. Having seen pictures of the Venza concept and then seeing it at an auto show a few weeks back, I thought maybe Toyota finally injected some sportiness into it’s bland (very) lineup. Then the words “Camry-based” popped up in the auto circulars. *Sigh*….no Magnum this is. I think this would be perfect for my Mom if she doesn’t get that RX she’s been pining over.
Yes, these are “tall” wagons, but even if squashed them down, they wouldn’t suffer from the idiotic, cargo-space robbing CUV curve of the Venza (and many many others).
It’s not the curve, it’s the load floor. Have a look at the Fit, and then the Matrix. The load floor of the Fit is something like a foot lower to the ground, and thusly it holds much more, even though the car itself is more or less the same shape.
The PT Cruiser, for all it’s other faults, got this right, too. So does the Versa. So do most minivans. Modern wagons, the Venza included, get it wrong.
psarhjinian
That’s a good point. I hadn’t thought of that. It’s a bit of both I’d say, load floor and curvature of the roof/trunkline.
I’m assuming the anticipated 2.7L four is the same one that was as in the Tacoma, right? If so, I don’t foresee any problem with its power output. My father had an ’07 Tacoma five-speed for a year until he traded it in for a Matrix, and the 2.7L torqued the nearly-4,000 pound truck around town and through rural routes with surprising ease, even with several hundred pounds of furniture in the bed. I’m sure the Venza’s gearing will vastly differ from the pickup’s, but I doubt that moms looking for economical family-haulers will have any issue with their CUV (Camry Utility Vehicle?) not pulling a six second zero-to-sixty.
In the meantime, I wish they’d fit that drivetrain into the Matrix S. That thing is a dog with the 2.4L and four-speed automatic courtesy of General Motors.
I had never even heard of the Venza until I read this review. When I saw it listed over there in the reviews column I was expecting one of those rare Euro or Asian market reviews. I guess either they don’t market this thing very much, or I don’t pay attention to Toyota very much.
pariah – this is an all new 2.7L. I’m guessing it will see duty in the Highlander, Venza, Rav4, etc. Hell, one might even see it in the Sienna. I’m guessing this will be the new economy engine for the CUV/vans. If they are smart, they will start paring that engine w/ the hybrid system and turn the rav4/venza/highlander into high mileage AWD CUVs. The AWD 4cyl venza is already supposed to get 28mpg. I’d expect a solid 31 or 32 mpg w/ hybrid help (highway).
I’d call this a station wagon, similar to the Magnum but a S/W neverless. Instead of SUVs maybe car companies should go back to making wagons. Good job Toyota.
I’m not a fan of the shifter or it,s position. I would rather see a column shifter. What happened to all the column shifters these days?
This thing is repulsive. Once again Toyota builts a bloated, over-creased barge with bulges that look like tumors. Who is responsible for their design language should be shot.
Wait, people are actually complaining about the Venza’s curb weight? Really? The test car was a V6, AND it had AWD. Further, the Venza has more interior room and more cargo space than a Camry. The Venza is just plain larger than a Camry. Obviously the Venza is going to be heavier than a Camry. The Camry also does not have an AWD option, which further adds weight.
Looking at the curb weights of a V6 Camry and a FWD V6 Venza, there is only a weight difference of about 400lbs. Considering the Venza is a physically larger vehicle, and also considering the Venza has bigger wheels the increase in curb weight is very reasonable.
And no, this does not look like a Ford Edge from the front. This looks like a Camry, and it also looks like Toyota’s FT-SX concept, which debuted WAY before the Edge was released.
As for the tire size, the Venza is obviously a compromise. Toyota sacrificed some practicality in order to give the exterior a more sporty and stylish look. This vehicle won’t appeal to some Toyota buyers, and it wasn’t designed to. The Venza was designed mainly to get conquest buyers from other brands, and also to reclaim buyers who left Toyota after the new Highlander became too large.
I’m not getting this one. Maybe after I have a chance to sit in one and drive it.
Reliability info soon after enough owners sign up to participate in TrueDelta’s research.
http://www.truedelta.com/reliability.php
Jared :
Toyota: Just give us a regular Camry wagon, one that is 400 lbs lighter than this pig.
Ha! Done and done, as of 2007. I found your problem: you’re on the wrong side of the dealership.
If you want a Camry wagon: look for the “Scion” logo and ask for the “new xB.”
Based on the only demographic I driving in that car, as a Camry ‘enthusiast’ you should find everything you’re looking for. Cheers!
By the way it also looks like Mitsubishi Lancer Hatchback and the Scion XB is better than this car
It’s about time companies started putting real leg room in the rear seats. I still like what Nissan did in their Versa; they sacrificed some hatch-trunk space to make the rear-seats roomier, but of course you can always fold the seats down for the carrying space. This is a configuration that makes much more sense to me, at 6’3″.
Wagons don’t sell in the US because the manufacturers are all trying to sell them SUVs, cross-overs, and minivans, at much higher prices.
The FT-SX concept that this is (very loosely) based on looked spectacular. This looks like a Camry with Ford headlights and a Dodge Journey rear.
The wheels are absurd. I’ve seen one with the optional 20s on the road (actually, Toyota dealer lot), and it just looks horrid.
Also, I don’t see Avalon in the front very much, aside from the bumper bulges (new on the ’08 Avvie). The Avvie has way more class than this housewife-mobile.
Soooo….this is based on the Camry platform, but it’s smaller than a Highlander. Damn if that D-pillar doesn’t look familiar. Is this basically the Toyota-badged and -trimmed version of the Lexus RX?
Since we own a current gen Lexus RX and I just rented a 2009 Highlander for a week of slogging through the northeast, I could sort of see this marketed at us (well, actually, my wife). The Highlander is a bit too big, and the 3rd seat is useless to us. We enjoy having a huge rear seat that you can either recline for comfort or slide forward or flip down if you need more cargo room (which is rare), since comfortable short range transportation for 4 is an important function.
Problem is, the pricing on this is creeping into RX-land (the Lexus dealers in south Florida have very aggressive pricing). And having owned a Toyota 4-Runner before the RX, I can tell you there is no joy is having your near $40k vehicle serviced at Toyota dealerships thinking “couldn’t I have bought a Lexus for this type of money?”.
Maybe it’s just me, but the Toyota dealers in West Palm Beach, Delray Beach, and Ft. Lauderdale are no place to spend any time…
Dang! This came too late for a TWAT award.
Wow another sport ute/ CUV type vehicle from the geniuses at Toyota. And it weights 4000 lbs, has 20″ overkill wheels and doesn’t come as a hybrid. So that means we now have the Matrix, RAV4, Highlander, Venza and Sequoia, 4runner, Land Cruiser and FJ Cruiser which are all wagon/CUV/Crossover based vehicles that get under 30 MPG. And GM is getting bashed over not being green or making vehicles that get good mileage. The ugly Prius is the only model that truly gets top MPG along with a 5 speed manual Yaris. The bland Camry with 4 cylinder and 5 speed automatic is rated at 31 highway which is 1 less than Optima and Sonota and 2 less than Malibu/G6 and Aura with 4 cylinder and 6 speed automatic. The big Tundra with the almighty 5.7 is rated at only 13/17 in the pickups while GM is getting 14/20 with the 5.3/6 speed and Ford is claiming 15/21 with the new 3 valve 4.6. The FJ Cruiser needs super unleaded for it’s stunning 16/20 rating. The Sienna van which is rated for 17/23 MPG doesn’t even compete well with Chryslers Caravan/Town and Country with the top most powerful 4.0 liter V6 at 18/25 MPG. The reviewer got some of it right. The porky weight, the rediculous 20″ rims, the blandness and unsporty driving characteristics. Glad to see that not everybody is drinking Toyota coolaid these days.
Another vehicle that won’t get me out of my Aztek.
It has a good 300 lbs more weight,too high a floor, too low a roofline with relation to the floor,and low-profile tires that are ridiculous anywhere that potholes occur.
As someone who grew up in a big family during the late ’50s through mid-’60s, I can say that the old big station wagons have a funky look and make great collectibles, but for utility and for passenger comfort in any position behind the front seats, minivans or minivan-based crossovers like the Aztek/ Rendezvous make much better daily drivers.
KalapanaBlack:
The FT-SX concept that this is (very loosely) based on looked spectacular. This looks like a Camry with Ford headlights and a Dodge Journey rear.
The wheels are absurd. I’ve seen one with the optional 20s on the road (actually, Toyota dealer lot), and it just looks horrid.
Look again: http://www.toyota.com/concept-vehicles/ftsx.html
Fact is the Venza looks a lot like the FT-SX concept.
So the Venza with the optional 20s looks horrid, yet the FT-SX with 21″ wheels looks spectacular?
ponchoman49:
Wow another sport ute/ CUV type vehicle from the geniuses at Toyota. And it weights 4000 lbs, has 20″ overkill wheels and doesn’t come as a hybrid. So that means we now have the Matrix, RAV4, Highlander, Venza and Sequoia, 4runner, Land Cruiser and FJ Cruiser which are all wagon/CUV/Crossover based vehicles that get under 30 MPG. And GM is getting bashed over not being green or making vehicles that get good mileage. The ugly Prius is the only model that truly gets top MPG along with a 5 speed manual Yaris. The bland Camry with 4 cylinder and 5 speed automatic is rated at 31 highway which is 1 less than Optima and Sonota and 2 less than Malibu/G6 and Aura with 4 cylinder and 6 speed automatic. The big Tundra with the almighty 5.7 is rated at only 13/17 in the pickups while GM is getting 14/20 with the 5.3/6 speed and Ford is claiming 15/21 with the new 3 valve 4.6. The FJ Cruiser needs super unleaded for it’s stunning 16/20 rating. The Sienna van which is rated for 17/23 MPG doesn’t even compete well with Chryslers Caravan/Town and Country with the top most powerful 4.0 liter V6 at 18/25 MPG. The reviewer got some of it right. The porky weight, the rediculous 20″ rims, the blandness and unsporty driving characteristics. Glad to see that not everybody is drinking Toyota coolaid these days.
You conveniently forgot to mention the fuel economy of the Venza, which is class leading. I will also remind that Toyota had the highest CAFE fuel economy average last year among major automakers, higher than Honda.
Johnson :
December 17th, 2008 at 10:32 pm
KalapanaBlack:
The FT-SX concept that this is (very loosely) based on looked spectacular. This looks like a Camry with Ford headlights and a Dodge Journey rear.
The wheels are absurd. I’ve seen one with the optional 20s on the road (actually, Toyota dealer lot), and it just looks horrid.
Look again: http://www.toyota.com/concept-vehicles/ftsx.html
Fact is the Venza looks a lot like the FT-SX concept.
So the Venza with the optional 20s looks horrid, yet the FT-SX with 21″ wheels looks spectacular?
ponchoman49:
Wow another sport ute/ CUV type vehicle from the geniuses at Toyota. And it weights 4000 lbs, has 20″ overkill wheels and doesn’t come as a hybrid. So that means we now have the Matrix, RAV4, Highlander, Venza and Sequoia, 4runner, Land Cruiser and FJ Cruiser which are all wagon/CUV/Crossover based vehicles that get under 30 MPG. And GM is getting bashed over not being green or making vehicles that get good mileage. The ugly Prius is the only model that truly gets top MPG along with a 5 speed manual Yaris. The bland Camry with 4 cylinder and 5 speed automatic is rated at 31 highway which is 1 less than Optima and Sonota and 2 less than Malibu/G6 and Aura with 4 cylinder and 6 speed automatic. The big Tundra with the almighty 5.7 is rated at only 13/17 in the pickups while GM is getting 14/20 with the 5.3/6 speed and Ford is claiming 15/21 with the new 3 valve 4.6. The FJ Cruiser needs super unleaded for it’s stunning 16/20 rating. The Sienna van which is rated for 17/23 MPG doesn’t even compete well with Chryslers Caravan/Town and Country with the top most powerful 4.0 liter V6 at 18/25 MPG. The reviewer got some of it right. The porky weight, the rediculous 20″ rims, the blandness and unsporty driving characteristics. Glad to see that not everybody is drinking Toyota coolaid these days.
You conveniently forgot to mention the fuel economy of the Venza, which is class leading. I will also remind that Toyota had the highest CAFE fuel economy average last year among major automakers, higher than Honda.
Oh you mean the not yet available base 2.7 liter 4 cylinder that should accelerate from 0-60 in 11-12 seconds! Please. And the only reason they had the highest average MPG was the Prius which bloasts the mileage figures in there favor.
ponchoman49:
Oh you mean the not yet available base 2.7 liter 4 cylinder that should accelerate from 0-60 in 11-12 seconds! Please. And the only reason they had the highest average MPG was the Prius which bloasts the mileage figures in there favor.
You should do a bit more research. All reviews of the Venza 4 cyl have it accelerating in under 10 seconds. Once again you have not mentioned the fuel economy, so I will mention it for you. A 2WD 4 cyl Venza gets 21/29 EPA. These are class-leading numbers.
The Prius boosts the mileage figures in their favor? You mean just like the Civic hybrid boosts Honda’s mileage figures?
You seem to have something against Toyota, yet nothing to say about Honda. Toyota has V8s and Honda doesn’t, which makes Toyota’s CAFE numbers more impressive than Honda’s.
This looks like a real attractive offering. And then I look at the price.
It’s a return to an AMC Eagle wagon, except reliable, which is great. And then I look at the price.
The space inside is nice, great to downsize from the bloated space that is infrequently used. But there’s this price.
Yet another automaker thinking they can somehow maintain the SUV margins of yore by repackaging. The Crossover thing was a last bated gasp. Chrysler had the nerve to introduce the Pacifica in only full-trimmed units, with a whisper campaign that it really had Mercedes bits, and then threw it up for grabs at 40k.
This Camry wagon should be nice. But no one can afford $35-40k middle-of-the-road cars just now. And it’s not even a Lexus.
The saddest thing of all will be when these pile up at first the lots, then the ports, then on ships anchored outside the ports (having no return cargo anyway). And then we will hear, America doesn’t really like wagons.
And so the segment will be blamed rather than the outrageously unrealistic pricing. And yet knocking off $15k-20k for this model would have shown how much America actually does care about wagons.
Seems like a down-market RX to me. They sure sell a lot of RX’s, so they will probably sell a lot of these.
I took a look at this at the Pittsburgh Auto show. Sometime early next year I’ll be shopping for a car that can haul 3 dogs and 3-4 people. My current Mini Cooper S isn’t cutting it in this regard.
The sig other was along for the tire kicking. I reservedly liked the Venza too, especially the generous leg room in the back seats. The dash materials are much less impressive up close than in photos; odd grains of plastic and vinyl, oily sheens here and there. I like the option of the 4cyl/AWD combination. Generous hatch area.
Coming away from the Auto show, we came away with these favorites –
Ford Edge (used of course, given rapid depreciation)
Toyota Venza (new or used, in a year?)
MB GLK (used or off lease? Again, likely rapid depreciation.)
Subaru Outback Wagon (My preference for the Turbo, better half prefers the fuel economy of the 2.5i; This was a surprise, I like it better than the new Forester)
X3 (compared to any Infiniti product we looked at, it is roomy by comparison. The EX hatch area is a joke, and the FX isn’t much better. Again, used.)
There was no new A4 wagon to poke around at, but I’d like to see it. I had a ford escape a while back and I still like them, but sig other find them to “Trucky”, yet still likes the GLK. Go figure.
One thing that my brother pointed out – 20″ wheels. For a family vehicle, those are some pricey tires. Especially for a non-sporting vehicle. They look nice, but man, what a bill to pay every couple of years. . .
And then 33k for a well optioned 6cyl? Doesn’t bode well with a GLK 4Matic starting at 35,900 a few stalls over.
Not sure where people are getting all of these tire replacement cost numbers. I’m looking at tirerack.com right now and OEM replacement Goodyear Eagle RS-A 245/50R20 tires are only $99 each. Add mounting, shipping, and all that and you are maybe looking at $550-$600 for all 4, OTD. I paid over 400 for tires @ Discount Tire for my 2004 Jetta 4 cyl a couple years ago (those were 16’s i believe)…I’m not really seeing the problem here.
My wife has her heart set on a Buick Enclave right now, I’m hoping I might be able to sway her towards something like the Venza, smaller, more efficient, and easier to park. Not to mention cheaper.