2002 Entry Level Luxury Crossover Comparison Test: Highlander, Rendezvous, Outback

NFS4

No Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
72,636
47
91
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/70543/article.html

Muahaha, Highlander won :D

Not much competition though;) I don't know about the squeaks though...our Highlander Limited has 6200 miles on it and we haven't heard one squeak...even after pounding down the pot hole covered piece of sh!t streets in downtown Baltimore.

Built on the same platform as the last-generation Camry, the Highlander shares much of its cousin's easy-to-drive character. Even with its significantly larger body, you rarely feel like you're piloting an oversize sport-ute. Light steering makes it easy to maneuver in tight spots, but at higher speeds, there's a distinct lack of road feel. The elevated seating position and large side mirrors give drivers outstanding visibility in all directions.

Inside, the Highlander racked up points for its spacious cabin, high-quality materials and simple yet elegant design. Our heavily optioned test model wore so much leather and fake wood trim that it almost looked as good as the Lexus. Clearly defined gauges and a well sorted control layout make you feel right at home the minute you sit down. Articulating headrests, firm side bolsters and a fold-down armrest earned top marks for the driver seat, but we were a little disappointed that the passenger still had to make do with manual controls, considering the vehicle's lofty price tag.

We were also a bit taken aback by the number of squeaks and rattles that permeated the interior of our test car. With Toyota's reputation for exceptional build quality, we often dismiss less-than-perfect test cars as exceptions to the rule, but as this was roughly the third Toyota in a row that displayed less-than-perfect build quality, we're starting to wonder if the reputation has begun to outpace the workmanship.

Rear-seat accommodations would be hard to improve upon. There's plenty of legroom and headroom, dual cupholders in each of the doors and high seatbacks with headrests for all three passengers. The 60/40-split folding seats can be laid flat by lifting just one latch, expanding the rear cargo area to 81 cubic feet ? better than the Subaru, considerably less than the Buick. The load floor was the flattest of the group, although the rear wheelwells intrude on the space considerably. The tailgate opens wide, and the liftover is low, but the lack of a separate liftglass prohibits transporting longer items.

There are very few reasons not to like the Highlander. It's easy to drive and quiet, and the cabin is attractive and spacious. Sure, maybe the styling isn't the most daring, but Country Squires weren't exactly the epitome of style in their day, either. If you're shopping for a family vehicle and thinking about a midsize SUV, check out the Highlander instead. It will get you and your family everywhere they need to go, and spare car lovers the burden of sharing the roadway with yet another oversize sport-ute in the process.

 

NFS4

No Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
72,636
47
91
Originally posted by: RossMAN
Why wasn't the Honda Pilot included?

They probably couldn't get one otherwise it most likely would have won with the Highlander getting second.
 

A5

Diamond Member
Jun 9, 2000
4,902
5
81
Hm...my parents are looking at buying either an MDX or and RX300 (mainly RX300 since the Acura dealers won't negotiate AT ALL on the MDX), and my efforts of pushing them towards the Highlander have failed (Mom: "It looks too truck-ish."), but maybe this article combined with the luxury crossover where the RX300 got a (probably undeserving) last place will help a little bit.

This really isn't an issue of my wants, but I'm just trying to look out for my parents. :p
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,398
8,566
126
huh? this isn't entry level luxury... wtf are they smoking?
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,398
8,566
126
Originally posted by: redly1
the buick is just a joke. I laugh everytime I see one

better than asstek. and the buick has tiger! what does toyota have? nothing! absolutely nothing! :p
 

NFS4

No Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
72,636
47
91
Originally posted by: ElFenix
huh? this isn't entry level luxury... wtf are they smoking?

Like hell it isn't. Have you ever actually BEEN in a Highlander Limited??
 

BigSmooth

Lifer
Aug 18, 2000
10,484
12
81
Why was my thread, posted 1/2 hour earlier with virtually the exact same title, locked? I'm so hurt! :p NFS4, try using the search function, you newb! ;)

Anyhoo, I think this was a weak comparo with nearly random vehicles in it (and only three of them), two of which I wouldn't consider "entry-level luxury". I'm not suprised the Highlander won, though.

I am surprised that Edmund's is actually questioning Toyota's supposedly bulletproof build quality. :Q I hope that it's not a trend.
 

BigSmooth

Lifer
Aug 18, 2000
10,484
12
81
Originally posted by: NFS4
Originally posted by: ElFenix
huh? this isn't entry level luxury... wtf are they smoking?

Like hell it isn't. Have you ever actually BEEN in a Highlander Limited??
I agree that the Highlander is not entry-level luxury, for the same reason I don't consider a fully loaded Camry with leather, Nav, etc. to be entry-level luxury. Dressing up a volume-selling car with all the bells and whistles does not turn it into a luxury car IMO. Even though the price and amenities would be similar to an A4 or a TL, let's say, the Camry is just not a luxury car.

As for the Highlander, Toyota HAS a luxury division which sells three SUVs of its own (including the upcoming GX). Toyota itself sells 5 SUVs, and the Highlander is the second cheapest, based on MSRP. Plus, it's based on the Camry (see above) and it's not marketed as a luxury vehicle. And as sad as it may be, having the premium badge is part of what makes a "luxury" car.