1st generation RAV-4--any good?

I'd ASSume, as it's a Toyota, that I really can't go too wrong, but I'm looking at a '97 RAV-4 for cheap. 2WD, 4 door. Needs some work, but nothing I can't handle. Any big things I need to watch out for? Thanks!

I believe it is the moral equivalent of a jacked up Corolla, like the Highlander is a jacked up Camry.

Outside of that it seems pretty straight forward.

My in-laws had one...tranny went before the warranty was up (extended warranty paid for it). Other than that, no issues. I actually liked driving it...fun, nimble, comfy. My wife hated the looks and it's a bit flimsy - but gets the job done.

I once considered buying one that "seemed" like a good deal. Over on Edmunds several (previous?) owners said the automatic transmission was kind of weak/crapped out at lower than expected for a Toyota mileages. Trying to find ANY Toyota with a manual tranny is next to impossible.

In the last few years, I've even run across a couple of 1st gen. 2 doors, one a hardtop and one a soft top. These were sort of a parts bin special. I believe the chassis really was supposed to be more similar to an All-Trac Celica.

Wife bought one new in 1997. 5-spd manual. Biggest pile of pooh I've ever had the need to work on. WE traded it in at 87k miles in 2001 for the Grand Vitara she still misses. At the time of trade-in, the PCM was jacked, the rear diff was toast, all 4 struts were gone, it needed a 4th catalyst, the plastic rock plate that protected the engine had caught on fire, car went through 3 sets (both upstream and downstream) O2 sensors and was the noisiest rattle trap I've ever owned.

In comparison the 2001 Grand Vitara we traded in had 0 problems at 98k miles and was one of the most dependable, capable vehicles I've ever owned.

And the Grand Vitara has some actual power. 5sp versions are not impossible to find either. I'd rather have the suzuki too.

You can swap a 3sgte in the RAV4 and keep the AWD.

Then go run the Dakar or something.

www.rav4world.com

My wife had one which we kept up to 120k miles. It too was a 2wd. Simple, reliable and efficient space which was a little noisy to ride in and a rough (bouncy) ride. It was slow but still only delivered so,so mpg.

Overall, it was a good choice. The car has been gone for years now and she still would like to have another or have it back.

We beat the GV a lot harder than that Rav ever thought of, and it held up so much better.

The one plus to the Rav, it was quick above 70mph. Of course, the engine was spinning at 4k rpms to do that speed, so it should have been quick. That was one vehicle that neither of us miss. She talks about the GV at least twice a week and it's been gone for over 2 years.

At one time when I was researching small 4x4s and I came to the conclusion that the RAV4 was more capable the CRV. If I remember correctly the RAV4 had a locking center diff and low range as opposed to the CRV. Traditionally the suzuki's have been good offroad vehicles and very reliable too.

Had mine up until 04, ran like a champ, never needed anything.

1st gen RAV's are relatively crude & underpowered IMO. I wasn't impressed.