I’ve been resisting calling Toyota “the new GM” for some time. And yet the world’s largest automaker is falling into the same traps that scuppered GM’s empire. By creating the entirely extraneous Scion “youth brand,” Toyota stole a page right out of The General’s poisoned playbook. Luxury brand reaching downwards, hoisting itself by its own petard? Lexus does as Cadillac did. Listen closely and you can hear ominous rumblings about Toyota’s declining build quality; a cancer that afflicted GM even as it soared to its zenith. And most damning of all: Toyota’s increasing portfolio of redundant, ill-conceived, poorly-executed products. Add the new Venza to that list.
The Venza’s aesthetic crimes are not quite as obvious as, say, a clown at a piano recital (i.e., the FJ Cruiser). Quite the opposite; the Venza is invisibly derivative. Toyota’s we-swear-it’s-not-a-station wagon’s shape, size, stance and “cut” rear haunches suggest the same relationship with Mazda’s CX-7 that links the PT Cruiser and the Chevy HHR (i.e., a total rip-off). But the Venza’s details put paid to the thievery theory. The Venza’s front grill is all Hyundai, while Toyota cribbed the Venza’s rear from the Lexus RX350—and added a Bangle butt (just for fun).
The last thing the Venza looks like is the Toyota Camry that lies beneath. Which was, I suppose, the point. Anyway, love it or hate it, you can ignore it.
Wander inside the new Toyota Venza and the damage created by designer-led differentiation is glaringly obvious. The Venza’s rear seating is generous. Indeed, cavernous. Literally. And not in a good way. The gun slit windows (complete with privacy glass) take their toll on external connectivity. It’s no wonder Toyota’s spent a big chunk of its Venza marketing budget appealing to owners with pets. Unlike children, dogs don’t tend to vomit from claustrophobia.
In terms of visibility, the Venza’s front row is even worse. The CUV’s severely raked windscreen creates the Mother of All A pillars; an edifice so large it has its own opera windows (a perfect complement to the rear opera windows). Cleverly enough, Toyota’s placed an LCD display within the resulting dash-top desert. Looking backwards, the mail slot that passes for the Venza’s rear window makes you wish the [optional] backup camera was a full-time gizmo. The Venza’s three-quarter blind spots are large enough to hide a sequoia. Both tree and SUV.
The Toyota Venza seems perfectly screwed together; all the dour but durable plastics fit with brand faithful precision. The Venza’s phone/MP3 player holder is excellent—just as long as you don’t mind plugging-in your iPhone upside down. While the glove box lid opens with oil-dampened satisfaction (down boy), the other plastic covers are flimsy and imprecise. The Venza’s ICE unit is so old-fashioned-looking it Hertz. And then there are the two squares of mouse fur resting at the bottom of the center cubbies. These mini-mats don’t fit, they’re not glued down and the plastic underneath is hideous, in a glassine sort of way.
Along the same lines, 20″ wheels? Even the Venza’s four-wheel independent MacPherson strut suspension can’t ameliorate the harsh ride delivered by these stylish wagon wheels. The Venza crash bang wallops over surface imperfections with all the grace (and none of the determination) of a Toyota 4Runner. The Venza’s trick V6 puts out more than enough oomph to not worry about oomph and delivers enough mpg not to worry about mpg (18/25). Too bad the Venza’s six-speed autobox hunts for gears like a truffle-crazed pig, and the brakes’ initial bite starts somewhere near the floorboards, and the handling is . . . irrelevant. Suffice it to say, the new Toyota Venza is most comfortable highway cruising. Just don’t change lanes without a spotter.
Not to put too fine a point on it, the Venza is a Camry-on-stilts with questionable styling, crap visibility and big ass wheels. Sensibly specced, the CUV costs just under or just over 30 grand, depending on engine size, driven wheels, interior coverings, etc. Kentucky has yet to build the stripper four-cylinder front wheel-drive Venza (must maximize profits while demand is, uh . . . ). The entry level Venza should clock-in somewhere around $26K before discounts. Which raises an interesting question: what the hell is Toyota doing? How does the Venza fit into Toyota’s product pantheon?
The RAV4 (and Mazda CX-7) are cheaper than the Venza. The Highlander is about the same price. All three alternatives offer better visibility, better packaging, similar mpg and equal, if not superior, inclement weather capability. You can easily understand why Toyota wants to build the Venza: flexible manufacturing and all that. But not why anyone would want to buy one. In fact, the new Toyota Venza proves the old adage: just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should. As GM proved.
[Read Martin Martineck’s Venza review here.]
Having seen this Car in the showroom at my local dealers place in Guelph, I was not too impressed, I like my RAV4 much better, to me it seems to be very heavy type of vehicle, very similar to the Chrysler Pacifica and we know what happened to that Car!
The Tim Hortons chain, a Donut and Coffee shop system are featuring this model in there annual “Roll up the Rim” contest, they are giving away 35 of these vehicles, last year they gave away a similar number of Toyota Matrix Cars, to me a much better idea.
I had some time to kill recently while awaiting the installation of a car stereo and wandered around the Toyota store, eventually looking at this. I can’t say I minded the styling as much as you did, but couldn’t figure out why someone would buy this one over the more practical Highlander. I’m not sure they’re yet ready for The Toyota Death Watch, but they are making some amazingly boring cars…
Then again, virtually everything that sells well is and has been boring. Remember when the Olds F-85 was the top selling car in America?
I forgot to mention that I also have Show dogs and consider the RAV4 a better vehicle, although I note that this Toyota vehicle as shown with dogs in it at the Westminister show in New York recently, like the Pacifica I know several Dog showers that had it, but found it too hard on Gas, even if you could load lots of Show dogs and crates in it, most show goers got rid of it in time.
Ouch. I guess Michael Martineck probably got up on the other side of the bed.
Anyway. I still maintain that if Honda and/or Toyota decided to seriously make wagons again they could convince consumers to come back to reality. You guys are sales leaders, right? Lead!
Well said. Toyota is indeed rapidly becoming GM and this ridiculous new offering proves this in spades. Does the world really need yet another cute ute tall wagon or whatever they want to identify this thing as? Notice the lack of hybrid or 4 cylinder model months into it’s introduction as if with gas prices around the $2.00/gallon mark Toyota doesn’t need to worry about being green until oil prices spike again. And why does something like this need massive huge wheel options? Wouldn’t a pair of 16’s on base models and 17’s on upper trim levels be enough?
I suppose the Nissan Murano and Ford Edge were still selling quite well when they started developing this. Toyota felt the need to jump on the bandwagon.
I saw this car at the NAIAS. To me, it looked in shape and size nearly identical to the new Lexus RX, if maybe sitting a little lower.
I don’t get this car.
I for one am sick of the CUV that is nothing more than a Camry with a lift kit and big tires. These things are station wagons designed not to look like station wagons. Hell, I’d even say the whole SUV craze started off with the Explorer and Grand Cherokee was nothing more than wagons that looked like trucks.
Please please please bring me a regular god damned station wagon. Call it a Camry or Accord “wagon” and give it the same specs as the sedan. I have cash in the bank waiting for that. Not crossing my fingers it’ll get spent anytime soon.
Slit windows and crappy gas mileage. Two main reasons I’m not in the car market right now. You can also add in overwrought styling.
If somebody comes up with something with 35 highway mpg, good visibility, and space for a middle-aged 225 pound six footer for $20K or less out the door, I won’t be too long finding them.
These tall boxes have too much cross-sectional area for decent highway MPG, and I can’t get comfortable in a Pilot or an Accord–making the Honda Insight pretty much out of the question.
@ Robert Farago,
A bit off topic, but going back to your question about becoming a subscription-based site:
This review of the Venza is the type of critical, honest writing that I would be willing to pay for. If I was able to download these reviews to a portable reader (iPod touch for example), I would be sold.
C&D became my favorite car rag 20+ years ago because it was willing to point out the bad points of the cars it reviewed. Those days are obviously gone forever. Hopefully TTAC will continue on with its honest reviews.
And regarding the Venza, it reminds me of Ford with the Taurus X, the Flex, and the Edge. Aren’t these all the same basic cars?!?
I happen to think the Venza is actually a decent looking vehicle. The grill being the biggest styling misstep. Instead of saying that the Venza is redundant, perhaps it is a more truthful statement that the Highlander or RAV4 are redundant vehicles as the Venza does offer something new to the lineup although perhaps not improved.
Also, I am not sure if Mazda CX-7 references were intended to made toward the CX-9, but the CX-7 does not offer a third row that I am aware of.
I gotta admit, at a quick glance on a computer screen, I thought I *was* looking at an RX350.
Why anybody buying this isn’t looking at the 09 Forester (what I have) or the RAV4 is beyond me.
I don’t know, I think the styling is hideous. To me, it looks like a Ford Edge that has partially melted.
The bloated CUV wagon strikes again.
I’m still confused as to why someone wouldn’t simply take a Sienna over this. You do have the price premium for leather and/or AWD but otherwise the Sienna literally does everything better than this model.
RAV4, Highlander, Matrix… hell, why didn’t Toyota just make the Camry into a wagon again? My brother drove one of those for 13 years (a 30-something doctor driving a Toyota wagon with a cloth interior, imagine that…) and we still have another family member driving that same one today.
I understand the marketing concept of the Venza. But in the rear world it simply has too many compromises and the price is laughably high. Something tells me this one is going to be a one generation wonder.
In the meantime, a lot of folks are still waiting for a mid-sized wagon that is high quality, functional and fuel efficient. Maybe it’s time I gave the Ford Flex a long-term write up.
Robert, great writing, but I’m not sure it’s a great revue. I know what you are trying to do, vent your frustration for Toyota not “getting it”. But this is a review not an editorial. I expect a review to point out the good and bad points of car. I’m no fan of Toyota, but they know how to make a car. It may be mediocre, but one star? I did have a good laugh (actually two, which had my co-workers looking over at me). My favorite lines:
“It’s no wonder Toyota’s spent a big chunk of its Venza marketing budget appealing to owners with pets. Unlike children, dogs don’t tend to vomit from claustrophobia.”
“The Venza’s three-quarter blind spots are large enough to hide a Sequoia. Both tree and SUV.”
Having driven this car, I have to disagree with this review. From a marketing standpoint, the question isn’t whether the Venza makes sense in their product line-up, it’s whether the 4-Runner does. The Highlander used to fill the Venza’s market segment, but now that that’s become bigger and more truck-like (a la 4-Runner), Toyota was lacking a smaller, cross-overish vehicle that was a little more refined than a RAV4. There are a lot of empty nesters who want a versatile car (not truck) that offers near-luxury aesthetics but without the luxury badge. This is the same segment that the Murano and Edge occupy, and they fit relatively well into their respective product line-ups. Many people in this demographic have the means to buy an RX, FX, or MKX/Z/whatever it is, but don’t want to look like a snob driving a luxury car (especially during bad economic times). Say what you want about Toyota’s quality, but it doesn’t change the fact that people (especially those in this segment) still perceive it to have one of the best reputations of any carmaker today. Throw in the fact that the Venza has a sound, thoughtful interior along with an exterior design that isn’t as off-putting as you suggest, I don’t think that bringing this car to market was a bad idea at all. The Venza may not have many unique design elements, but it arrives as a unique package that stands out in this segment.
I mean absolutely no disrespect to you, Mr. Farago, or to TTAC when I say this, but I really don’t understand the one-star review. To put this in the same category as the G5 just doesn’t make sense to me.
I will just Echo others comments, I do not get this thing at all. The looks are, to my eyes, are not completely horrible but why anyone would want this car/wagon/CUV thing when Toyota it’s self have so many alternatives is a complete mystery.
I do think the author has a point that Toyota are making a lot of missteps. Perhaps having the new family guy at the helm will help. Alternately we may be looking at the start of GM 2.0.
I saw the Venza at the car show; in baby shit brown, no less. I have to say that i actually liked the look from the 3/4 rear view, although the tail lights look a bit to Volvoish. But i liked the rear haunches. What i hated was the trying to be trendy placement of the shifter and the entire front end. What’s with that hideous grille; is it supposed to look organic or something? And enough of the high window sills. If i can’t comfortably rest my arm on it during the nice weather with the window open, i wont buy it.
Steven Lang:
In the meantime, a lot of folks are still waiting for a mid-sized wagon that is high quality, functional and fuel efficient. Maybe it’s time I gave the Ford Flex a long-term write up.
I have a Flex Limited FWD as my family hauler which I got to replace my Nissan Pathfinder. Dont call it a crossover, it is wagon plain and simple. The interior is everything you could want and more in a family hauler, the fuel economy is good for a vehicle of its interior volume. I understand that the looks are polarizing, but functionally, the Flex is on par with a mini-van in many ways. Ford put a lot of effort into the Flex and it shows, too bad the market is ignoring it thus far.
I don’t call it a crossover because I don’t think it’s one at all. It’s a wagon with a slightly raised height.
Robert probably thinks I’m probably a bit off the beaten path to find the Flex such an interesting vehicle. In the ‘North American’ world, I think it’s a complete bullseye for a middle aged fellow with a family of four (yours truly). But then again maybe not.
Yeah, this review really did seem a bit over the top to me. First time I remember being told that a car would cause people to puke, literally. A tad harsh? Intersting mental image, given the light colored seat fabric in the photos.
Agree though that it would be bloody hard to rationalize the purchase of one of these over a RAV4, which is a pretty darned practical vehicle, and much better looking.
If what you really want is AWD in a true wagon, what the heck is keeping you from buying a Subaru Legacy? Mileage isn’t fantastic maybe, but otherwise…
This car looks fantastic, they really hit a home run with this car (as they did with the FJ Cruiser). I really don’t know what you’re talking about, Robert. To each their own.
I can’t comment on drivability, but Consumer Guide only gives it 4/10 for sound deadening and 5/10 for ride, or about Civic and Corolla territory. I wouldn’t get one because it doesn’t seat 7 (which LA Times Dan Neil was wrong when he said it was a manufactured need), but I think 1 star is an exaggeration.
Patrickj:
You just described the Honda Fit. Enjoy.
You can easily understand why Toyota wants to build the Venza
Yes, and it’s not because of flexible manufacturing, it’s because the Highlander (and to a lesser degree, the RAV) are cratering and they need another margin queen. That’s the point of crossovers: getting people into higher-margin vehicles.
It’s the same purpose the following serve:
Ford Flex (versus a minivan)
Ford Edge (Fusion wagon, Escape)
Mazda CX-7 (6 wagon)
Mazda CX-9 (MPV)
Nissan Murano (Altima wagon)
Chevy Traverse (Uplander)
BMW X5 & X6 (5 touring)
BMW X3 (3 Touring)
…you cannot charge much more for a low-end SUV, minivan or wagon versus it’s sedan equivalent—people will not pay the premium for a commodity vehicle—but a luxury or pseudo-lux crossover can certainly demand a premium over a more pedestrian vehicle.
Seriously, you could buy a Sienna for at or below the price of the Venza. You’d get about the same mileage, acres more space, actual visibility, and—oddly—better handling and a more enjoyable ride. But the Sienna doesn’t make Toyota much money, and the bulk of the Siennas sold are CE/FWD trim, where the Venzas sold will probably be more uplevel.
Or so Toyota hopes. Which is silly, because if the non-sales of Flex/Edge are proving anything, it’s that without easy credit and/or lots of liquid wealth, people are not buying cars like this. Anyone buying a Venza is going to have to walk past the Matrix, RAV and Sienna first. They’ll have to justify the lower value-to-dollar ratio, and chances are they can’t do it. A refreshed Sienna or an actual Camry wagon would have probably garnered more sales, but the Venza has been in the pipe for a while (it’s the production FT-SX) that they couldn’t turn back.
Here’s another example: in Canada, in 2009, Chevy still sells the Uplander minivan. They sell it very cheaply (CA$16,000 cash) and it’s moving very, very well, despite being eclipsed by every van on the market, but also Chevy’s own Traverse, which is very pointedly not selling at all. I don’t know if GM makes any money on the Uplander, but they have to be making more than they are on the Traverses that are rotting away. I suspect the situation at Toyota dealers, where base RAVs and Siennas are still moving, is going to be much the same.
Want another example? Ask a Nissan dealer how they feel about the Rogue and Murano being in the same showroom. Or a Ford dealer about how desperately they’d like the Freestar back.
Its a 1* mostly because its a “wrong trend” IMO.
It competes too directly with two existing vehicles (Rav4, Highlander), yet it doesn’t have the utility that you’d get if you took the camry and made it a wagon without the extranious lifting.
Have not driven one, but slanty A-pillars on Toyotas scare me, having blackened my eye and smacked my head boarding/unboarding a Highlander.
But the concept of this car I think is great. I am highly attracted to this model.
And then I look at the price tag, and I see a top end AWD unit is kissing $40K. And I realize that is probably over $10k what this is worth to me, and that I can buy two SX4’s, or a whole lot of other alternatives.
So when this otherwise attractive model flops because Toyota priced it too high, we will say America hates wagons, that’s why no vendor offers a full-sized one.
An honest and negative review of a Toyota… I love you guys!
Got to agree with the couple of posts above, it looks like a lowered RX. This style of vehicle hasen’t seen a whole lot of success.(Freestyle/Taurus X,Pacifica)
But honest station wagons have never been that successful either. (Camary, Accord, Magnum)
Everytime I see the Venza, I think AMC Eagle.
I think Toyota would have been better off (and would have cost them a lot less in development and advertising) if they would have just built a Camry wagon. Niche vehicles for Toyota should be Lexi, you would think that they would be smart enough to have learned the wrong way to do things (a la GM).
Looks like a Lexus,Fit,Subaru outback and corolla.
Wow Toyota really need a new car designer.
I never liked the Toyota for one Good Reason Not the interior, engine,suspension or handling.
Their car design just sucks man!
What’s up with the automatic gearshift creeping further and further up the console? Looks like more and more new cars follow this trend robbing larger folks like me of the right knee space.
To make things worse, oversized wheels and the required crash zone around them intrude on the left foot space.
Can we get a mid-size sedan-based wagon with 15-16″ wheels and a shifter on the floor or on the steering wheel?!!
I sat in the Elantra Touring on the local car show and I can bet that if Hyundai makes a Sonata-based wagon, they’d make a killing selling it.
WaftableTorque
Do you or anyone you know actually OWN an FJ? How about a Camry or Corolla?
Remember: a car can be terrific vehicle and still be a huge mistake for a brand. The Lexus IS-F, Chevrolet SSR and Porsche Cayenne all spring to mind.
In this case, the Venza is not a great vehicle AND it’s a brand mistake. It may sell well (I doubt it), but if it does it will cannibalize its stablemates. Which, psarhjinian, is not a good idea. Ever.
but now that that’s become bigger and more truck-like (a la 4-Runner), Toyota was lacking a smaller, cross-overish vehicle that was a little more refined than a RAV4
TM should have refined the RAV4 or downsized the Highlander.
Look at the interior pic above. The mass of the C-pillar draws your gaze, I know, but look at the transition from the rear door to the cargo area. Completely different color and material. It looks like an afterthought, like a Camry that had an SUV rear end grafted on . . .
Gamper, Steven Lang:
Couldn’t agree more about the Flex. My wife and I have 2 kids and a big dumb dog and our trusty Saab 9-5 wagon has simply become too small. We have always preferred smaller, fun to drive cars, but the reality is we need space.
We have been shopping for three-row vehicles and have narrowed our choices to the Flex and CX-9. The CX-9 is a sportier ride, but for family duty, the Flex is unbeatable. I love how it looks, but the most surprising thing to me was the overall quality, from the fit and finish to the panel gaps to the interior material quality.
I’ve never owned a domestically branded car, so this is a huge leap for me. But I think the Flex is that good. The only problem – the Saab! Trade in values are horrendous, so I’m trying to sell privately. What a pain! Meanwhile, my local Ford dealer is just blowing these things out – offering me a brand new SEL for $7K off MSRP! The one benefit of being ignored by the market I guess.
Oh…the Venza. Meh.
Good review considering the Venza is the automotive equivalent of a yawn.
And enough with the oversized rims… I don’t know which manufacturer started it (probably Nissan), but when Toyota is jumping on the band wagon you know it’s played out!
Whats up with Toyota’s fugly front ends? This afflicts every one of their vehicles now.
Is it just the picture angle, or does that thing have no cargo room?
Is it just the picture angle, or does that thing have no cargo room?
And that IS the problem with the modern wagon verse the wagon of the good old days. Most of todays wagons are just 4 door hatchbacks, not station wagons of old.
Steven Lang: I’m still confused as to why someone wouldn’t simply take a Sienna over this. You do have the price premium for leather and/or AWD but otherwise the Sienna literally does everything better than this model.
Me, too. But my own sister got a Volvo XC90 over a Sienna, and over a V70 because she didn’t want either a wagon or a minivan. And she should know better!
I actually like that Toyota is trying to get back to wagons, everyone should in my perfect fantasy world, but I completely agree with the Toyota becoming GM editorial spin.
The problem isn’t that this particular car is going to cannibalize sales (although I think it will, I’d call that a common mistake), it’s the fact that Toyota dosen’t seem to benchmark superior vehicles when signing off on new product. This rush to fill market niche’s by rearranging parts on current vehicles is fatally flawed b/c the current vehicles just aren’t as good as many of the competitors.
I’ve had my frequent criticism of Toyota challenged in the past along the lines of different strokes, etc… and I’ve given it hard thought. The problem is, especially after spending a week in UT with a family that drives Toyotas, that I can’t name a single thing that their cars did better than say Honda or definitely VW. I can’t even point to an area of basic competence in light of their price ranges and expectations. Not breaking is no longer special, or even unique, Toyota needs to benchmark VW’s engines/transmissions, Honda’s chassis/suspension design and anybody’s steering racks if they don’t want to follow GM’s example of milking brand loyalty to a sad death.
Which, psarhjinian, is not a good idea. Ever.
I’m not arguing with you on that point (that cannibalization is generally bad). I was just explaining what Toyota was trying to do with this car (eg, make oodles of money) and why, were this 2005, it would have been economically sound.
If it doesn’t cost Toyota much to do this vehicle (and, really, it’s little more than a shortened Sienna on dubs, so that’s entirely possible) then there’s no real problem making it if you have the sales numbers to support it. Toyota isn’t pulling a GM by having four cars (RAV, Highlander, Sienna, Venza) because they’re doing it in the same showroom. It’s only a cannibalization issue if you’re losing money on all the vehicles in question.**
Where they are making that mistake is with the Venza and the RX, LX and Land Cruiser, ES and Camry, and (this is the big one) RAV and xB. Within each brand, though, it’s not too bad. The Sequoia/Land Cruiser are far more problematic in these terms.
The problem with the Venza isn’t with the Venza. The problem is with the RAV and xB. Fattening the xB required fattening the RAV, which made the reason for an FT-SX production car problematic. This shows a brand-atypical lack of strategy on Toyota’s part (that the RAV, Scion and Venza teams weren’t talking). Had the xB stayed small, the RAV could have as well, which would have made the case for the Venza smarter.
As for being brand-defiling? I don’t think that’s the case here. There’s noting anti-Toyota about the Venza any more than the Edge and Murano are anti-Ford/Nissan. The Venza was more or less Toyota’s response to the Murano’s (at the time) sales success***. And again, it’s still valid, just not in a market this poor.
** which they’re probably doing now, but they might not have been in 2007, and might not should they be the last big manufacturer standing.
*** It’s funny that Nissan made the same mistake with the Rogue/Murano as Toyota is making with the Venza. You can see automotive groupthink in action.
Is it just the picture angle, or does that thing have no cargo room?
That’s a common problem on crossovers, and it has to do with the floor height. If you look at, say, a Honda Fit or Element, or any minivan with fold-to-the-floor rear seats, you’ll see how low the floor is at trunk level, and it allows piles of useful space. In a crossover (and many hatchbacks) the floor is almost waist height.
I’m at a loss as to why this is done.
Since I see so many “why would anyone want this car” posts, I’ll respond.
I currently have an 07 VW GTI and an 05 MINI Cooper S. My commute is short (5 mi). My wife’s commute is short (9 mi). I’ve still managed to put 35k miles on my GTI in 25 months due to lots of travel on weekends. While great cars, they are very limited in their practicality. This is where the Venza comes in. It is available in AWD w/ a 4 cyl getting 28mpg. My parents live 220 miles away across mountains that get insanely difficult to drive in the winter. It fits adults very comfortably in the back seats (so my parents, brothers, etc aren’t crammed back there). It can actually tow 3000lbs, which is what I need for home improvement projects. Being the DINKs that my wife and I are, we tend to like things a little on the luxury side. We will have fun daily runabouts in the GTI and MINI and have the Venza for weekend trips and home depot runs. The car has a clever interior and looks nice for a reasonable price (4cyl/AWD) while having AWD and good fuel economy. I am a huge Subaru fan, but the passenger room in the back seats in the Outback, and especially the Forester, doesn’t compare. The Venza fits the bill. My only complaints are the 19″ standard wheels (which won’t be an issue as 19″ tires are more commonplace now) and the lack of a stickshift. Honestly, though, my GTI and MINI will be there when I want to row my own gears. The Venza should deliver the type of reliability that ensures that I won’t be stranded when the MINI and VW need service down the road.
How is this anything other than a low-content Lexus Rx 350?
The tiny windows make me think that the Venza design team members were channeling their inner Caliber.
WRT Toyota’s product overlap, perhaps this is the anti-Aveo: an expensive nichemobile intended to encourage buyers to go with the more practical mass-market vehicle. People hear about the Venza, then find out that they can get a Sienna with more room or a RAV-4 with more off-road capability….
This is what the Ford Edge should have looked like. The Venza looks like a sporting, low slung Edge…while the real Edge looks…just terrible.
Me, too. But my own sister got a Volvo XC90 over a Sienna, and over a V70 because she didn’t want either a wagon or a minivan. And she should know better!
I took a lot of time to sell my wife on a Sienna. She wasn’t comfortable with the size, or (and she admits this now) the general minivan-ness of the thing, but after three weeks she loves it. It’s easy to drive, park and use.
The modern minivan really is the station wagon done right.
This is what the Ford Edge should have looked like. The Venza looks like a sporting, low slung Edge…while the real Edge looks…just terrible.
I don’t agree. I think the Edge is a very attractive vehicle, while the Venza looks like a design-by-committee compromise; the halfway point of a morph of an Edge into a Murano.
Uh huh.
A bland, bloated CUV for bland, bloated people. Um, the front is like a watered down Hyundai.
I suppose the “crash bang wallops over surface imperfections” might keep you awake.
If Toyota is the New GM, then Venza is the new Caprice Wagon. The sheetmetal hanging over the tail lights even recalls the Caprice’s wheel well skirts of the early nineties, right down to the bloated-porpoise effect.
The harder carmakers try to make station wagons that don’t look like station wagons, the more awkward things get. If there is so much demand for utility vehicles that are less “trucky” than Sequoia, 4Runner, FJ Cruiser, RAV and Highlander, for God’s sake just build a Camry Wagon and call it that.
Ford products have a lot of problems which they have not overcome in the last several years like Fires caused by defective parts to Metal that love “Rust”
I saw a Chev Uplander advertised in the Toronto press for under Can.$14,000 dollars, this Van is considered by both Consumer Reports and Lemon Aid as the worst example of a Van and to be avoided at all costs, good thing its the last year for this “Pig”
My wife was totally in love with this car because of the Top Chef ad campaign. I think the market for this car is limited to her friends: mid-30s to 40 moms who are tired of their dead-reliable Siennas and want to get their mojo from something, anything more stylish than a mommy-van. But she cannot afford an RX, or doesn’t want one because of the “socially frugal” movement. Becuase you can’t be seen down at the CSA coop with a vehicle that screams conspicuous consumption anymore.
Then we went to the dealer and she declared it: nice. But she was just being polite to the salefolks. Later she declared it too big. I think the lack of visibility freaked her out. Bullet dodged. Except she now thinks the RX is “cute”. I think I could sell her on an Edge if the interior were just a little nicer, and it didn’t say Ford anywhere on it. Who am I kidding? No one. I’m checking dealers and CL for low-mileage RXs. In my mind it’s very socially acceptable to recycle someone else’s exhorbitant off-lease.
Isn’t Honda working up one of these wagons now? They’re beginning to look like silly-putty stretch images of Camry/Accord/Mazda6.
Why the knock on the FJ Cruiser? It looks like a giant Tonka toy for a giant sandbox, which is pretty much exactly what it is.
If Toyota is the New GM, then Venza is the new Caprice Wagon.
Except that the Caprice and company had actual, real cargo room.
I also think (I’m gonna let my freak flag fly here) that the early ’90s B-bodies are handsome vehicles, even today.
*ducks*
Maybe the Venza designers should visit this place:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/03/19/suicide.forrest.japan/index.html
BDB–well said sir. I love my 94 Roadmaster.
BDB is absolutely correct about the 1990s B-body GM wagons.GM made a horrible mistake in abandoning
the rear-drive, body-on-frame CAR market and putting all its eggs in the Tahoe/Suburban basket.
Getting back to Venza– it’s another overweight, low-utility junker with ridiculous gangta rappa wheels that won’t get me out of my Aztek.
Whenever I see the Venza, the Edge, or the Lincoln Edge derivative I think, “That Aztek looked lots better before Paul Buyan sat on it.”
BTW, I don’t care about EPA figures. What’s that pig’s real world stats? Mine are an average 21.5 in town, 25.5 highway, all-time high of 29.8, all-time low of 17.6. Can fat-ass real-world Venza come anywhere near those numbers?
it reminds me of Ford with the Taurus X, the Flex, and the Edge.
Flex – huge, stylin’ (depending on opinion)
Edge – medium, stylin’
Taurus X – perfect, market rejected.
I think one star is a little harsh here – it seems competent, and the styling is personal view. Overall I happen to like it, but would only consider the 4 cyl. I am, however, not a fan of swoopy windshields and the opera windows. WTF?
It’ll be interesting to see what Honda does with the Accord wagon thing. Jacking it up and/or slapping an Acura label on it will certainly put it easily into the $30’s…hopefully they remain sensible and let it be an Accord wagon.
My wife has a genI Highlander, and needs more storage space for her work. Loves the Edge, MKX, RX, and Venza which all have less space than her Highlander. I don’t think she needs a vehicle footprint much larger than what she has now…but nothing out there seems to hit the sweet spot…
Any ideas?
The RAV4 (and Mazda CX-7) are cheaper than the Venza. The Highlander is about the same price. All three alternatives offer better visibility
I thought most of TTAC’ers preferred wagons over SUVs. And now you complain about visibility?
“But … she didn’t want either a wagon or a minivan. And she should know better!”
Exactly.
She – like most of the American public in this segment -doesn’t know better. Toyota’s success has never been built on cars that are leaders in performance, or in style, or in price. It’s been built on cars that give consumers what they want, as expressed by market research meticulously obeyed (see the mechanically soulless but impeccably reliable “Lexus” line of Deustchland lookalikes).
The fault here doesn’t lie with Toyota. It lies with a popular culture that has convinced moms that it’s a mortal sin to look or act like a mom, with a vehicle sensible for the needs of a mom. Which is why we now have a whole generation of women running around in black SUVs that can’t go off-road, while wearing “designer” plastic sunglasses, and blond hair with the black roots plainly showing in a style cribbed from 20-year-old Madonna’s impersonation of a prostitute.
Toyota won’t lose its audience until it misreads it. I don’t see slam-dunk evidence of that in this car.
GM, Ford, Toyota, Honda, and Mazda as well as other manufacturers offer family-size station wagons, some of which are high-performance models, in many markets, but not in the USA or Canada. Perhaps the forthcoming Cadillac CTS wagon is a harbinger of more wagons here.
Too bad the Venza’s six-speed autobox hunts for gears like a truffle-crazed pig
I think the original from a Car & Driver review of the third gen Chrysler minivans (with the infamous 604 4 speed automatic) was that the transmission “hunts like a Jack Russell terrier.”
Just two of these enrolled in TrueDelta’s panel so far. Not selling terribly well?
For pricing, fuel economy, and reliability (once enough owners sign up):
http://www.truedelta.com/models/Venza.php
I would have to respectfully disagree. While the writing is as clever as always, this review gets too hung up on the blind spot issue, the 20″ optional rims and the misunderstanding of the vehicles target demographic.
By all means point out the visibility issue and advise readers not to opt for 20″ wheels but don’t let it turn into a rant against the whole vehicle, culminating in a one star rating (the TTAC equivalent of a one finger salute). Are you placing this vehicle in the same class as previous TWAT recipients? This is the car that the RX350 is based on – does it also get one star?
The Venza is filling the Camry wagon demographic for folks who want a practical vehicle that avoids looking like an SUV. It’s a Camry so it’s not exciting to drive but it’s decent value even with leather and a V6.
@Nicholas Weaver :
Patrickj:
You just described the Honda Fit. Enjoy.
Even though sub-Corolla/Focus sized cars make me nervous, the possibility did cross my mind when I looked at the latest version of the Fit the other day.
Given my trouble getting comfortable even in large Hondas, I’ve tended to write off the whole line. Resales also make buying new almost mandatory.
What exactly is a truffle crazed pig?
I don’t know, the front end styling reminds me of a first-gen. Fusion. The goofy opera windows and the huge dash remind me of GM’s U-Bodied Dust Busters.
Patrickj: Ergonomics/comfort are personal preference. Sit in the Fit and see, since its really TALL relative to the floor, its good for bigger people.
The Fit is the ultimate Tardis car: Small on the outside, frakin huge on the inside:
“Too bad the Venza’s six-speed autobox hunts for gears like a truffle-crazed pig….”
Others may try, but they can never truly imitate the master.
The Venza looks fine to me. Not bad. Not good, but not bad. People will buy it just because it’s a Toyota, which evidently is the problem.
So.. I just checked out Toyota’s website to see what their lineup is…it’s ridiculous. They still make the Highlander! Talk about having too many options, they really need to kill a few things off their lineup. Why is the Forerunner & FJ Cruiser still there? ugh…
I’ve seen a whole lot of them in person and the freakin 20 inch rimz really stand out.
1-star vs 4-star https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/review-2009-toyota-venza/
That’s quite a discrepancy! Personally, I despise this car. It represents the worst aspects of a marketing exercise. Built to appeal to people who know nothing about cars and have messed up priorities, such as:
– SUV looking without any capability (“I can hop curbs at the mall like nobody’s business.”)
– Raised driver seating viewpoint with terrible visibility (“I feel in command of the road, but I am going to crash into someone changing lanes”)
– The squishy handling of a bland sedan with a raised center of gravity (“I may rollover changing lanes!”)
– Design at the expense of practicality (“I shoulda had a station wagon”)
– More gears than it knows what to do with (“I may spend more time changing gears than in gear, but more is better, right?”)
Plus the sort of driver it may appeal to is someone who needs visibility as they probably aren’t paying as much attention to the road and a lower center of gravity as they probably aren’t very aware of the limits of its handling.
They still make the Highlander! Talk about having too many options, they really need to kill a few things off their lineup. Why is the Forerunner & FJ Cruiser still there? ugh…
You can, sort, rationalize the lineup like this:
1. Downsize the xB back to it’s original size.
2. Downsizing the xB allows Toyota to sell the short-wheelbase RAV/4 in North America again.
3. Downsizing the RAV helps the Venza make sense.
4. The Highlander, like it or lump it, exists to satisfy people who need a minivan but can’t buy one. They can’t abandon it, much as the Sienna is a better vehicle in every way.
5. Cut either the Sequoia or Land Cruiser. My bets are on the more-expensive Cruiser, as the Lexus LX more or less fills this niche and the Sequoia is cheap to make.
6. The 4Runner is not really a bad vehicle, if you can a) understand it’s a single-purpose vehicle and b) Toyota can do the same and stop trying to making it into the Highlander, instead of the Tacoma-with-three-rows it really is.
7. The FJ should be a Scion. And it should shrink in size, becoming to the xB what that 4Runner is to the Highlander. Imagine a modern Samurai.
8. Don’t f_ck with the Sienna.
The problem with Toyota’s truck lineup is that it shows an uncharacteristic lack of strategy. They seemed to go through a phase of “Build anything that stands a chance at selling”. A little bit of forethought and you can see where they really ought to be.
It also makes me wonder about Jim Press’ stint at Toyota North America and what that may have meant in this context.
I think it might sell if they let the grill droop a bit and called it the Camry Sportback.
Ill chime in this time since so many have recommended my cars (or variants) as alternatives. From my experience, this advice is dead wrong.
As an subaru legacy owner AND a mazda cx7 owner this venza is on my radar for the very reasons you actually criticize this vehicle for: Space, reasonable mpg, and a very decent v6 awd platform.
Im a huge believer of the Subaru AWD system but the legacy simply lacks the space that both the venza and our cx7 have for weekend provision gathering and yes, two medium sized dogs.
The CX7 is exceptionally capable in terms of a utility vehicle with an underrated awd system and pretty solid handling. However, it suffers from too much road noise, inexcusable mpg, and an insufferable highway ride with the OEM tires (switching to the OEM Ford edge continentals solves this FYI).
Its isnt that the Venza is a terrific car all by itself. The Venza seems to compromise in areas that appeal to alot of people though. Adding this to the garage besides the Legacy sedan is at the very least, on my radar.
Hmm. I like the Venza (but only sat in one in the showroom). And I love the FJ Cruiser styling, period. So I differ with your opinion on style. And I think Scion does have its place because it differentiates (more earlier than now) from mainstream Toyota (e.g.: no-haggle pricing, factory customization, and unique styling). Others are catching Scion, however (Kia Soul, Kia Rondo, etc.).
But I am concerned about the growing GM-ness of Toyota. Quality issues will kill them.
We live in strange times when people actually consider cramping themselves into a compact 4dr sedan as being luxurious when a Honda Odyssey or Toyota Sienna are about the most comfortable vehicle on the road today. Luxury is NOT spending an hour in the backseat of G37 or even 5 series. I wont even mention a C-class, IS, or 3 series.
Even in wagon form a 3 or 5 series BMW is not going to “cut the mustard” for a family of four and their gear. OK, maybe my 9 year old son would be comfortable but even my 5’6″ 150lbs 16 year old nephew will be full of moans and goans after 2 hours in just about any RWD sedan outside of a full sized car.
The Venza is a vehicle for those that do NOT want a RAV4, Sienna, or Highlander but do want some extra usable space that is not offered in a Camry or Avalon. There are many families that do not need to seat more than 4 but do need or want a hatch to carry some odd shaped stuff.
I personally know of two people that have made recent purchases of Venzas and they were never in the market for a Crossover or SUV. For both the runner up was a $30,000 Honda Accord v6 ex-l. The Venza simply won out because it was just as comfortable and DRIVABLE yet offered far more practicality. Both opted for FWD v6 models that listed for about a little over $30,000.
It is important to remember that the RAV4 is NOT classed as a car and it does lack a real rear bumper. It is built like a light truck and also feels like one on the road. The 3rd row is useless and the interior IS a step below the Venza. Nor does the RAV4 even offer up the options and features that are available in the Venza. Many, many people do NOT want a side swinging rear gate (equiped with a wheel carrier) the actually open in the wrong direction anyway.
On top of that once you add the v6 and AWD the RAV4 quickly morphs into a $30,000 ride, which is rather pricey for what it is.
On the other hand a Highlander is just too big and will drink EXTRA gas for no good reason.
If one finds the Venza silly than what do they make of a “jacked-up” FWD RAV4? IMO THAT is stupid vehicle. Unlike the Highlander, Murano, Edge, CX7/9 the Venza still makes sense when only equiped with FWD.
Now in all fairness the Venza is NOT a $35,000+ vehicle, just like the the RAV4 is not a $30,000 vehicle. Just because you can option one out to that price does not mean anything. Hell, I can option out a Boxster S to well over $100,000 but I would look rather foolish claiming that Boxster is a 100 grand car.
Toyota has always offered up “loaded” versions of many models that manage to stretch the price into higher territory. This strategy has worked very well for Toyota because Toyota KNOWS who its costumers really are and what they want. That is why you can purchase the LARGER Avalon limited for the price of a loaded ES350.
Like it or not “top of the line” Toyotas do have a certain prestige value in suburbia. It is not uncommon to see a Sienna Limited sharing a garage with an S-class Benz.
It is easy to point out the Legacy Outback as an alternative without considering how much the Legacy does SUCK in many ways. The Legacy is a cramped car with a very uncomfortable front passenger seat. The Outback model handles like trash and unless you opt for a high strung turbo w/ stick it aint much fun so what is the point!
Oh ,it also lack the value of the Venza because you really do not get much until you open your wallet to the tune of over 30 grand.
Went you view in that light the Venza does start to make a lot more sense than Robert is giving it credit for.
“The Venza is a vehicle for those that do NOT want a RAV4, Sienna, or Highlander but do want some extra usable space that is not offered in a Camry or Avalon. There are many families that do not need to seat more than 4 but do need or want a hatch to carry some odd shaped stuff.”
The Ford Edge is better looking and has more useable cargo space.
I must say this is entertaining to find out how much room is needed for a family of four. My wife and I vacationed more than once when our kids were 9 – 12 and our ’82 Supra was our traveling car. we just brought less stuff along and everyone seemed happy. Dad was certainly happy, since he wasn’t driving a bus; mom was happy because the two in the back were well separated and we could all talk whereever we were driving. The more crap you haul with you, the more you have to deal with while you are supposedly on vacation from all your crap…
That said, I don’t mind small wagons, as they are eminently usable and still serve dual duty as cars. The Impreza/Outback looks like a nice size, but I have no use for 4WD.
Three years ago when I bought my ’06 Highlander, the Venza is actually the car I was looking for. all of the other SUV’s I cross-shopped – the Mitsu Endeavor, Honda Pilot and CRV, and RAV 4 (didn’t have v6 then, Outback and Tribeca – were too big and heavy or too small. What I wanted was a medium sized AWD station wagon. The Venza is exactly what I, a childless 45 year old with a dog, wants. The perfect car needs to get decent gas mileage, have decent cargo capacity, handle better than a CUV/SUV, have plenty of power to climb mountain passes fully loaded, and not too fancy for my dog. Unfortunately, the Venza might be too much car. Those 20″ wheels are a deal breaker. No way I could afford to be replacing those and winter tires every couple of years.
Hey if your a “Ford Man” than I guess the Edge, Flex, or even a TaurusX will make you happy. I have had the pleasure of driving all and must admit that I found all to be great long trip vehicles. The main difference between the Edge and the Venza is that the Venza does NOT have the “jacked-up” on stilts look of your standard CUV. The same goes for the Flex and TaurusX and I like that. For that matter I will also admit that I am one of the few people that thought the Chysler Pacific was a great vehicle.
I will admit that I believe the Venza is a brilliant vehicle for Toyota coming to the market at the right time, believe it or not. Other than some stamped sheet metal and some molded plastics for the interior the rest of the stuff is strictly “parts pin”. The thing is nothing more than a freaking Camry underneath of which Toyota is making millions of world wide each year. I will bet that with economy of sales it actually cost Toyota less to make a Venza than a RAV4. I will bet that it can also be built on in the same plants on the same line as the Camry if it is not already.
Using off the shelf stuff Toyota has a new vehicle that is basically unique for whatever class you wish to place it in. Using a simple Camry platform Toyota has a product that actually competes with both current Ford products; the Flex and the Edge. It has the stance of the Flex with basically the size of the Edge. Seen together the Venza makes the Flex look like a “dropped” Explorer, size wise. On the other hand the Venza makes the Edge looks like a garden variety CUV.
The Venza will appeal to those that do not need the “extra” space and do not wish to wish to be jacked up in the air for no reason at all, yet it still gives a higher view of the road for those that require that false sense of security.
In the Venza I see the same type of formula that Toyota used to make the current RAV4 so successful. The RAV4 is hit because it actually has the useful space that people want in a fairly light weight compact package for what it is. While all the other CUVs in it class are crammed the RAV4 has real useful space. This is because Toyota actually listened to what RAV4 and other CUV owners had to say.
The Venza is in many ways the perfect vehicle for a current Sienna or Odyssey owner to retreat to when they realize they do not need all of the extra space anymore. These are the families with 2 children that are now over 6 years old and do not need strollers and car seats anymore. At its price point compared to the current value and demand for a used Toyota or Honda Mini-Van you will come out very good on a trade-in for a Venza, it is a win-win for both customer and dealer. Maybe that is why I am seeing quite a few of the loaded Venzas showing up in the NYC metro area.
The Venza also works for all the mini-van and SUV owners that have discovered the joys of a hatch but wish to down size. Saying an Edge or another vehicle hold more misses the point that the smaller size of the Venza is its advantage.
Say what you want about the styling but the general buzz is that it is actually an OK looking car. I would say on par with the new Accord. It appears that many like it and some don’t. Yes the grin is a bit too toothy but I think most can live with that. As to those wheels, hey America is in love with big rims. If a Boxster can roll around on 19″s I think a vehicle that sits at least a foot higher can do with 20″s. They look good on the car anyway. If you drive it like you want to hurt it I sure you will not enjoy the ride. But hey that is NOT what Toyota is advertising or selling.
@tonycd:
(see the mechanically soulless but impeccably reliable “Lexus” line of Deustchland lookalikes)
Not to mention incredibly comfortable, which is what a lot of people want.
Being a little extreme (allow me), kudos Mr. Farago. For telling it like it is.This car sucks! Very telling why the American market gets the kind of cars it does due to there being so many defenders of this turd out there…
Peace!
Those wheels are ridiculous. Sure, they’re optional, but they still had to design the wheel wells and arches to fit them. That thing could surely be half a foot smaller in each dimension with sensibly-sized wheels while losing no interior space. The whole damn market is gone crazy with big wheels, probably to hide the bulk of the vehicles. Then, the vehicles need to be bigger to add space that the larger wheels took away, and then…
This is for the average dummy who blindly buys anything Toyota makes – whether based on price, ignorance or bias towards “other” auto makers.
psarhjinian wrote:
The modern minivan really is the station wagon done right
In all honesty, the modern minivan is the original station wagon. They were flattened much later. The original ones resembled a very spartan combination of a minivan and a Suburban (in fact, they were sometimes called suburbans). All we’ve done in the past 80 years or so is experiment with a proven design just to go back to it.
Personally, I see the market the Venza. The Highlander has been increased in size, and is now a 3-row cross-over. The Rav4 (which I’m driving now as a rental), is smaller and downmarket of the Venza. The Venza is a 2-row vehicle, pitched against Flex and Murano.
While I’d prefer a Camry wagon over the Venza, there is a market for it, and a niche in the Toyota line up.
Paul Niedermeyer: “How is this anything other than a low-content Lexus Rx 350?”Well, it has a different grill.
But, other than that, I suspect that’s the whole point – the Venza is the poor-man’s Lexus RX 350 and is aimed squarely at that market of people who aspire to own one of those but can’t quite yet afford it.
It’s hideous. The public is to blame for opening their wallets and encouraging this sort of garbage.
“The Venza’s front grill is all Hyundai, while Toyota cribbed the Venza’s rear from the Lexus RX350—and added a Bangle butt (just for fun).”
Can I get a clarification on the term ‘Bangle butt’? I was pretty sure it applied to the incongruous melding or overlapping of two different lines into a kind of goofy bulge, like an old-fashioned skirt bustle (as seen on the 7- and 6-series, then on the Acura RL). In contrast, I don’t think the 5-series has a Bangle butt, even though Bangle drew it. But now I see the term applied to any busy over-styled rear? Maybe you just wanted to say ‘Bangle butt’ just for fun?
Since I’m going to be in the market in a few months I had a look at and sat in the first Venza I came across at the local dealer. Robert, your review is right on, not because I happen to agree with it but because you focused on the functions this car is supposed to perform. I agree that one can’t see out of it and that makes it dangerous. It shouldn’t be allowed on the road. The blind spots are everywhere. IMHO there’s no reason for 20″ rims on any passenger vehicle just as there’s no reason for anything less than 50 series tires on any passenger street vehicle. Why any company would sell a product that’s designed to cannibalize its own cars is beyond me. This mish-mash is a clear example of fashion over function and as such it deserves to, and will, fail.
As for your choice of words in your review: brilliant!
thank you for the review it was very insightful. All the more reasons for me to buy the Passat Wagon.
Quote:
Patrickj :
March 20th, 2009 at 8:05 am
Slit windows and crappy gas mileage. Two main reasons I’m not in the car market right now. You can also add in overwrought styling.
Add in bland generic derivative styling, huge oversized tires, bloated shapes, ugliness taken to the extreme, cost cutting taken to new heights(no glovebox lights, no trunk lock cylinders, no floor or puddle lights, no bodyside moldings, one rear seat map pocket instead of two, no rear seat armrest etc), lack of choice in both options and model offerings,too many FWD/SUV/truck offerings and you make up the majority of the vehicles we have been offered(shoved down our throats) this dreadful decade so far.
since this thread is still active (sort of). I just got my first real deal look at the Venza yesterday, on the street, with other cars. It’s HUGE. The owner was there, and proud as hell of his ride, he even let me sit in it (always a risky proposition; on Jamaica Ave. (Queens, NY) any new-model lease you see is definitely being driven by a Brooklyn drug dealer, this guy was no exception). So yes, the car reeked of pot, but I still got to poke around his optioned to the gills example.
The interior was nice enough, and definitely better than the impression I was left from pictures (remember, optioned to the gills). Also, the exterior dosen’t come across as R-classish at all to me, even though that was my impression from photos. Instead, the combo of montrous freaking wheels, hatchback and a high ride height made the car appear aggresively stubby. If I’m going to really compare this to Mercedes styling I’d say that the Venza is the offspring of a Gwagon and R350 who was then abandoned at an orphanage run by Flava Flav, where it picked up zero good taste.
Ultimately I don’t think it was heinous, even though the person who penned that monster grill needs to be culled from the gene pool. I didn’t however, see any possible market for it styling wise that isn’t already completely dominated by 24″rim Magnums and 22″rim Impalas. Too ghetto, too much wheel, and no standout utility argument to make. This was the pre-ghetto’ed loaded version though, so maybe without some options it looks tamer.
Venza is a great value in Canada. You know, everything up here is at ridiculous price as compared to their American counterparts. But the Venza is actually priced very reasonably.
The base model is around $28k CND, about the same as an Accord Ex or an Impreza “one step up from the base level” (forgot the trim name, probably = base US model). The Venza AWD model is a little bit less than $30k. A great value, considering Fits usually sell for $20k+; CX7 is about $2.5k more expensive.
I agree with some who note this review is to much on the editorial side. There is no sense of balance. It seems like a pure attack versus logic. No doubt the Venza styling is like other vehicles that have caused a “love it or hate it” feeling among consumers.
I love TTAC for bringing contant that is not afraid to tell it like it is. This review seems to bash the Venza more then review it. I have driven both the Venza V6 and 4 cylinder models and enjoyed the drive. It is a niche vehicle without a doubt.
Toyota developed this vehicle with mostly parts they already on other vehicles. That makes it a relatively cheap vehicle to develop. To say Toyota is becoming like GM is a stretch. Toyota has superior quality to most GM products and is a leader in hybrid technology. It is hard to argue with their success. GM has been struggling for over 40 years now. Sure GM made profits, but the lemons they pushed onto consumers created the generations of Americans who will not trust American brands again. If Toyota starts more brands or buys others like Mazda or Nissan, then I would be more willing to say they are getting to be like GM.
The Venza is attempt to appeal to more people. It is a wagon and Toyota marketing blew it by not just saying it is one. Modern wagons can be impressive. I would have issue driving an A6 Avante, 3 series wagon, or some of the other wagons on the market today.
The Venza is more like a 3 out 5, not 1 out of 5. Only time will tell how truly good or bad the Venza is, but for a niche market vehicle it is fine in my opinion.
Well I’ll try not to “flame” the writer or other posters…but they have certainly flamed this car, this company and anyone who may feel they have a logical reason to buy this vehicle. I like Toyotas and we have had tremendous luck with their products. We are an empty nester couple, both 46. Our last great vehicle was our 2003 4runner, which we just sold after 175K great miles. We also own a 4×4 Tundra.
Our reasons for buying the Venza: tired of getting less than 20mpg on our vehicles, need someting easy to park, run errands in, good backseat room and comfort (reclining back seats for travel) Our son plays college golf and soon pro golf– lots of trips. A hatchback for access to clubs, groceries etc, something more carlike than the SUV. So the Venza was exactly what we needed- The RAV? Are you joking?- cramped and not appealing to 40 somethings….Highlander too expensive. WE are tired of paying 30 to 45k for vehicles- America needs to take a hard look at what they are spending their hard earned cash on- we actually WANTED the 4 cyclinder- Im not racing anyone for gods sake….we are getting an avg 27 mpg with this Venza and 30 on the highway. We bought this FWD, 4cyl for 23K out the door…nuff said on the economics of it…And dont come back and say I dont know the SUV/truck market…..I have a 120 acre farm – Tundra land and 4runner was great– but the Venza DOES fit a demographic that Toyota needs- what they need to do is cut down on some of their Highlander versions and RAV versions. Im sure this car will be a reliable runabout and golfwagon to beat up for years to come…man some folks on here must really get into this car thing….venom flowing and all…its just a freakin car…I want certain functions, fuel economy, dependability, muti purpose and a little roominess- all for half what we would have paid 3 years ago when everyone was better off financially….
This is an excellent car. I live in Ontario and I am going for a test drive. CAN’T WAIT!
What color do you all like?
My wife had a 91 Camry Wagon. Great car. Her next two cars were an Avalon and a Highlander. She’s into reliability, not cars. She drove the Venza and did not like it. She felt that it was impractical. Trying to convince her to get the A6 wagon or 535xi wagon.
Wow, we just spent the weekend test driving the Venza and basically finding out what it is since I had not even heard of it until last Friday. I have to say, I’m almost 180 degrees out of phase with this review. Let me start with the thing I agree with. I do see some similarity to the PT Cruiser type of look to this thing. Not that it looks like a PT, but its that same sort of style idea. People look at it and say “What is this?”.That aside, the more I looked at the style, the more I warmed up to it. My wife seemed to like it a lot (interesting as we will be trading our BMW 335i in for this). See, we now unexpectedly have a baby on our hands and while my Tundra handles things well in the double cab, the 335 is a back-breaker to get the seat in and out of. The wife is not interested in mini vans (been there, done that) and really does not want to go the SUV route (BTDT again). We like the space in the Venza. I rode in the back seat with the baby seat in the center and was quite comfortable. I dont find the ride rough at all (I guess that’s compared to a truck and a sports car). It had pleanty of pick up (we drove the 4 cyl and the 6). I thought the milage was pretty reasonable. 21/29 for the 4 cyl, 19/26 for the 6. I think this car would be ideal for our needs. Not a giant soccer mom-mobile, but pleanty of room for a family of 3 plus cargo.
I dont see toyota turning into GM at all. What’s wrong with experimienting with this type of vehicle as long as you have pleanty of go-to models (camry, Tundra, Highlander) and build a solid product. I’ve owned 3 toyotal trucks (outgrown one with 125K on it, wrecked my 05 Tundra, and just got the 08 Tundra) and am very satsified with all. We had a Lexus GS 300 for a couple of years, again a great, reliable car (maybe not the pizzaz of a BMWr).
Anyway, I think this review is off and hopefully folks who are looking for something a bit bigger than a sedan, but a half step below the CUVs will check this out and make up their own minds.
Don’t quite understand the extreme negative venom about the Venza here. It’s not just another (gag) sport-ute crossover. (Now if it were another Hummer…) It’s much closer to a station-wagon but with more style (which looks good to me). I really dislike the jacked-up, boxy SUV that you have to step up to get into, and I won’t own one on a bet. Mini-vans are not my cup of tea either. I want something with a hatch-back and fold-down-seat to haul bulky items that has more cargo room than a sedan, but with similar handling, a relatively low height, good gas mileage, and a spacious interior. The 4-cylinder Venza has that. Of course the 4-cylinder is not a barn burner, but the reviews I’ve read said the power is quite adequate (unless you load it to the max. but with just a wife and a dog, I won’t) and when gas again hits $4 plus (and it will), I’ll be glad I have the four.
I test drove the Camry and the Venza, this is a graceful adult vehicle, for people who want more versatility than the Camry. The height was perfect for getting in and out of the car, as well as accessing the trunk area, which I cannot say about the RAV nor the Highlander, or most other CUV’s. Loading and unloading does not require being swallowed up by your trunk. The Camry wagon was always ugly, and wasn’t all that roomy for those IKEA trips. The back seat release mechanisms, are within easy reach in the trunk, so you can do everything from the back, instead of grunting to fold down stiff unyielding seats from the passenger side. The only thing I didn’t like was the car strained when I drove it up the ramp in the garage at the dealership. Somehow the vision of driving through the mountains on my road-trips sort of faded on that note. I don’t think the Venza is one vehicle too many in the Toyota barn, I think they finally found something that fills a niche perfectly in the Toyota lineup, that borrowed from the Lexus stable. With GM you can’t see the forest for the trees, with all the rubbish they push out, but Toyota still brings out smart cars, including the Venza.
The answer to a question no one asked. This is the first time I have seen Toyota screw up in targeting a market in a long time.
The last thing that Toyota needs to do is add another CUV, SUV, crossover to their list.
When I test drove the Venza, I actually asked if the vehicle has any parts in common with existing vehicles. I was visualizing repair nightmares, if the vehicle became obsolete – I tend to always think in WCS’s. The salesman indicated that the Venza was originally designed to replace the RX, not add another vehicle to the list. Not sure if that nugget of information is accurate or not, since it came from a salesman. I personally can’t figure out why they would replace the RX, its the least atrocious of the Toyota/Lexus SUV’s. Instead they stuck the Venza in the Toyota line and downgraded it. So I guess this is more of an orphan Frankenstein, than anything else.
It seems to me that Toyota targeted their market quite well. It’s just not the market some people may think.
The Venza is a somewhat unique vehicle. It has small to medium SUV type room but wider, without the boxy look of one. Being lower it’s easier to enter and load items into the back, and likely handles better than a tall SUV. It’s not a station wagon, since it’s slightly higher and not just a car with an extended rear end and hatch back.
So it has more room than a typical station wagon, without the ungainly look of an SUV. It you have to categorize it I suppose it could be considered a sort of lowered crossover SUV, or perhaps a cross between an SUV and a station wagon. Whatever it is, I think it hit a good target.
save the tall AWD wagons to subaru and volvo, they do it better.
If you like Lexus RX or Chrysler Pacifica, you will love this car.
Of course this is combination of passenger car and SUV. Excellent rear access, but this no tuck. Three in one? almost, and I adore this setup. Interior top edge.
Bon voyage!
I liked Robert Farago’s Venza review. One thing he pointed out is the blind spot pillar. I drive on Texas I-35 where big rigs rule. I grew up on California freeway driving. When I say rule, I mean they get you in any lane you’re in and you better be able to see left and right if you want to quickly get out of their way — which I do.
The main reason I’m looking at the Venza is because my wife really likes the styling. Right now I’m driving a 2007 Honda Pilot which I love. She doesn’t because she thinks it’s like sitting in a truck. The Pilot has great visibility and the handling is decent considering it’s an SUV. I put in a Pioneer navigation shortly after we purchased it. The mileage is way better than I expected, about 19 to 20 city and 24+ on the highway. It has cylinder management which brings it down to 3 cylinders on freeway driving and it’s hardly noticeable.
I don’t like the Venza based on the several reviews I’ve read. I’ll compromise and go for a test ride but I’ll admit I’m soured on the what I’ve read so far.
I’ve owned Ford, Chevy, VW, BMW, Audi, AMC Rambler (ashamed to admit it), Toyota (car and pickup truck). I’m older, maybe not wiser but I have no qualms about saying the Pilot is the best vehicle I’ve owned. Age has a way of moderating one’s views.
Myself and my wife just purchase a Venza, and we love it. We are both diehard Honda fans, but wanted a family vehicle that was roomy, good on gas, and all wheel drive for our Canadian winter.
I really do question some of the feedback on here. The Venza has some key features that makes it stand out in the Toyota line up. The Rav4 cost’s about $4,000 CND less than the Venza, but does have nearly as much room as the Venza and it’s swing arm door would be a pain. Driving up to a curb to drop off something and have to walk around the door to get to the curb. It’s just not practical. Why have a bigger vehicle to haul around stuff, just to have it’s door get in the way when offloading?
The Highlander cost’s about $4,000 CND more than the Venza. If the Venza is so much more expensive than the Rav4, why is the Highlander being compared? With the third row seating folded down, it does seem to have as much rear cargo space as the Venza. But it can only take four people. The Venza can take five, and have as much room.
The Sienna also burns more gas than the Venza. Plus the mini van family vehicle is really played out. The Venza offers something different.
If your looking for a roomy vehicle that’s good on gas. The Venza wins hands down in the Toyota line up. I don’t understand how people question Toyota marketing. As far as styling, I understand, different strokes for different folks. But I have has so many people come up to me and ask me about our Venza. They love the styling, room and big rims. When I tell them the gas mileage they are floored.
The 4cyl engine is smooth and has more than enough power for city and highway driving. From owing and drive a Venza in the heart of downtown Toronto, just stupid crazy traffic sometimes, well all the time really lol, changing lanes is on par with my Civic. It’s a bit longer, but every car has a blind spot. Changing lanes in a Venza is not difficult.
For the ladies, a nice feature is that my wife was able to put her purse in the centre console. Her purse is not small. For the guys, four gold bags can fit in the rear no problem.