2020 Toyota Highlander Hybrid // Does *36MPG* Make THIS America's BEST 3-Row??
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 23 сен 2024
- It's TIME for the 2020 Toyota Highlander Hybrid Platinum REVIEW! At 36MPG this 3-Row SUV is unparalleled in the segment, but is its nearly $53,000 price tag too much?? And with a new 4-cylinder powertrain instead of the old model's V-6, is this a full-efficient-but-slow Highlander? Go ahead: CLICK to find out :) Also, be sure to LIKE and SUBSCRIBE if you enjoyed this review -- it helps us more than you can imagine!
Please SUBSCRIBE for updates on our latest videos! HELP US REACH 250,000 SUBSCRIBERS!! It's FREE!
/ carconfections
Follow us on our social medias!
Instagram: car_confections
Snapchat: carconfections
Website: www.carconfections.com
As Tested (Highlander Hybrid Platinum): $52,272
Links
Special thanks to...
Frankfort Toyota, in Frankfort, KY:
1001 Leestown Rd, Frankfort, KY 40601
www.frankfortto...
Toyota Entune 2020 Detailed Tutorial:
• Toyota Entune 3.0 (*No...
Intro Music:
"Lagos 230 A.D." by Otis McDonald is free for use on RUclips for any purpose.
#hybrid #toyotaHighlander #carconfections
#highlander #highlanderHybrid #35MPG #toyota #kiaTelluride #hondaPilot #carreview #cars
© Car Confections, LLC 2020. All rights reserved.
“Sampling the Latest Automotive Delicacies!”
Toyota still rules the hybrid market and this is another great offering, the cvt transmission notwithstanding. Some may be disappointed with the 4 banger but can't argue with 35+ mpg!
I just bought this car yesterday. I love it so much 🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰
Congrats!
how much you get???
Congrats I bought one week ago
@@nvkn2680 go to the dealer and check out.
@@nvkn2680 52 k
I’m impressed that you guys were able to already review a Hybrid, and a Platinum no less! This is the car I’m definitely getting next month and I’m excited!
I have a 2015 Highlander Hybrid Platinum and love it. Best vehicle that I have ever owned!
It was good timing! Thanks!
@@kris00723 Most people buy the Highlander instead of leasing it. It's a no-brainer due to having the highest quality of any SUV in it's class and highest resale value.
I’ve had mine for 2 days and I will say it’s an absolute pleasure to drive. Great suspension and so well designed inside and out. The mpg is blowing my mind. Good job, Toyota!
I love the 2020 Toyota Highlander hybrid, it’s very nice!! Toyota makes good cars!
Great review guys ! You're the best ! The new Highlander is awesome...waiting on mine. I do like the v6 better, but kudos for the amazing 36mpg for those who are after the savings ! Enjoy your weekend !!Stay well and healthy !
You too!
this channel has come a long way. keep living the dream!
Thanks! 😁
Nice review guys - just helped my parents with their purchase of a Pearl White Highlander Hybrid Platinum today and they are extremely happy with it - I had them watch your review first
That awesome! Glad to hear we helped! 😁
*These gentlemen produce the highest quality auto reviews on RUclips. No playing around. No trying to be a celebrity, funny or cute. Just solid info to help us buyers out. I'm subscribed. Congrats to both of them!*
Beautiful car..I have small suggestion..when mentioning safety features for any of your future reviews you should mention the number of airbags a vehicle has
Thank you for explaining the different interior options/colors with the different trims!
This was a really good review. Definitely looking to test drive both the hybrid and regular gas highlander. I would’ve liked to see how much room the trunk has when both rows in the back are down. I felt that was the only thing missing- Since I do have 2 huge Bully’s that are part of the fam. 😊 thanks for the review!
Thanks! 😁
Great Video as Usual. Can't believe a SUV like this could get 35 Mpg.
In real life it won't.....just marketing numbers.
@@waheed502 Yes, you are correct. Out 21016 was advertised at 27 and we are mostly around 19-20. The best I have seen was a 21.
@@Sprchgjeep
Liar.
I get more than the EPA ratings.
I,ve noticed a lot of liars against toyota,s superior hybrid technology.
Either that or you drive like a maniac.
@@waheed502 Nah real world numbers from testers has confirmed it. These new toyota hybrids are really efficient
If they come out with a PRIME version, I will buy one.
I could see that
$53K for a top end Highlander is better than spending $58K on a maxed out GMC Acadia Denali
Naveen Krishnamurthy i dont know how people justify to buy gm or ford over this? Better mpg, reliable, well i would get a Kia because it’s cheaper, but gm no way
No way will I pay 50 grand for a vehicle. My home only cost $40,000.
@@stevensevek6151 You don't live in my neighborhood, my friend. Unless you're living in a tent. :)
Steven Sevek what kind of dumpster is 40k? Cheapest house around here is 250k.
Naveen Krishnamurthy Ew NO
Nice review. Waiting for the Genesis Gv80 reviews to come
I think with the traffic in Lexington a hybrid would make the most sense.
36 mpg is unbelievable
Yes it is.....
Real world is about 30 (another review I saw) but still impressive for this size
@@ginger_breadman wrong. i own one. winter time real world is 30 mpg. summer is 33 mpg.
@@mobgma : FWD or AWD?
@@ginger_breadman awd
Great review guys. I'm going to check the hybrid model out, can't decide between it and the regular model. We're empty-nesters, the 3rd row seat would be an after-thought for us. But, I'm guessing if you've ridden on any airlines lately, the 3rd row may feel familiar. Keep up the good work!
Apart from mpg is there any thing that this vehicle has that is more attractive than the Telluride SX AWD trim?
If this has good MPG, I cant wait to see what MPG rating the hybrid sienna will have!
Andy's Shop Is there a Toyota Sienna Hybrid in the future? Cooooolllll
@@legendaryslayer1234 yeah its hybrid only I think
Cost wise-36 mpg using regular gas is equal to almost 50 mpg for vehicles requiring premium gas
Just bought an XLE today. Price a little higher than quoted. Would add that Driver seat very comfortable. I think the road noise is a little loud,but something I can get used to.
Love the new Highlander, but no height adjustment on passenger seat and no auto dimming or folding mirrors?
Unless I'm wrong...
Did all the headrests have an aggressive, forward rake?
Every vehicle I looked at a few years ago had these forward angles and they were all NOT adjustable.
Sure hope the new Highlander's headrests are adjustable.
Got a chance to see your interview today with the dean of Gatton at UKY!
How's this compare to Volvo XC90 T8 plug-in hybrid
BEST Review I’ve seen for this vehicle!....Thank you so much...Getting One!🤙
I think for a 4 cylinder vehicle it has some good power, I was amazed at when I test drove this and hit the pedal to peel out right from the get go. Slam this into sports mode and you will be surprised at the power it kicks out. Great vehicle! Bought me one and loving it.
Congrats on your new Highlander!
@@CarConfections Another thing I notice you both didn't try was putting it in Sports mode and trying out how much power this 4 cylinder can amaze you.
Which has most softer and floaty ride the 2021 highlander v6 or 2021 highlander hybrid
Enjoyed this review. What was the device you were using to measure noise decibels ? (brand/model please).
Thanks! I'm not sure of the brand but we got it on Amazon
If I were in the market for a full size SUV, this one would be in the top 2 or 3 to consider.
@Daniel Hernandez don't forget the Toyota Sequoia & Toyota Land Cruiser
have u guys reviewed the genesis g70? I love your reviews!
Not yet! But hopefully we will be able to soon!
Hi Guys,
Thanks for sharing very helpful video. I've been dsy dreaming about upgrading from my 09 Forester. Forester has been very reliable but gas mileage is something im not thrilled about. I do like the reliability of the Toyota brand. We also have a 2011 Sienna.
Safe travels. Keep up the good work.
Thanks!
Beautiful car my friend...I repair the rear panel,,not a steel is a plastic
These rims are the same rims as the 2020 Lexus GX dark alloy rims, except the GX's are a little darker.
can you add turning radius to your reviews. nobody does this!
Great idea
Please show rear seats center arm rest . Please do it
Drove one this weekend - DID NOT get 36 mpg - got 23-thecruise control and driver assist is really weird. it accelerated suddenly i- and i had to cancel to stop it - I do not like it - luckily it's a rental
Great Review very nice I been seeing a lot.
Is it a good option for uber XL drivers? Or the sienna? Any opinions?
They're both class.
Great review guys, but two things to add: 1. I heard that you currently cannot add Totota trailer hitch to any of the upper end trims due to interference with tailgate sensor. It's crazy to have a SUV that you can't add a hitch to., and 2. Is it true that Toyotas "lane centering" technology is very lame compared to Hyundai and Kia's? Hopefully these two items will be addressed and soon be corrected. BTW... do these models take regular or premium fuel? (This is a question which should be added with any review at premium costs a great deal more than regular.)
Love you guys!!
Why Toyota did not bring the “Prime” plug in power train to this unit as they are for the rav4... boggles the mind?!
J Mack yea my thoughts exactly. I’d also opt for a bigger battery in place of the third row
Dr Dre you must be one obnoxious person. 1) the Highlander wasn’t always a 3 row vehicle. Look it up. 2) you don’t know my lifestyle or my requirements to tell me what vehicle I should be getting. Move it along little guy
That third row seats is a bummer for me.
Will you be using the third row space a lot?
Howdy, awesome video as always!😻
Thanks as always!
I'm going to own this SUV by Christmas this year
Did I miss the extra cost of awd?
I love you
The main competition for this it the Hyundai and Kia twins. I like the looks and options of the Korean cars but like the quality and reputation of the Toyota. Interior is a toss up but there is more room in the Korean brands and better warranty as well.
Can’t wait for a Highlander plug-in hybrid
Why not turbo charge the hybrid engine for more horsepower?
are you first to youtube with a hybrid video?
Have no idea. Hopefully!
wow the engine sounds really noisy. I wonder if that's just the microphone in the video. seems more muted than the RAV4 hybrid though. just the engine note sounds like a WRX😄
Those for whom fuel efficiency is their highest priority will find the Highlander to be the best 3 row crossover in the marketplace. Not so much for those who value other features. Third row legroom, for example, is 27.7". That's 2.3" less than the back seat of a Ford Mustang and less than any other 3 row midsize crossover on the market. Not bad for those with legs amputated below the knee, bound and gagged hostages, and very small children. Otherwise, one wonders why a three row crossover is even on the shopping list.
There will, of course, be those who choose a Toyota based on its reputation for reliability. But a high RANKING in terms of dependability says little or nothing about the actual INCIDENCE of reliability issues. The 2020 JD Power survey of over 34,000 owners of vehicles purchased in 2017 found that the Genesis V80 and G90 were the most dependable models sold in the US after 3 years of ownership. Genesis owners on average experienced less than one issue over the first three years of ownership, a figure that was 34% higher than the average for all brands. That sounds impressive until you realize that the owners of all other brands averaged less than 1.5 problems over the same period. In short, the average owner of other brands, well over 95%, experienced NO PROBLEMS, whatsoever over 3 years. Ever wonder why virtually all brands offer at least a 3 year bumper-to-bumper warranty for their vehicles? It's because manufacturers can be sure they'll be called upon to redeem those warranties for very, very few owners.
Consumer Reports has an annual survey of owners that include older vehicles of well. But CR reports ONLY RANKINGS, not the actual incidence of reliability issues. And what does the reliability of a 5, 7, or 10 year old vehicle tell you about the reliability of a new 2020 vehicle when the nameplate may well have been applied to a model that has been redesigned at least once and possibly twice during those years?
The fact is that purchasers of ANY new vehicle in 2020 can expect to experience a VERY LOW incidence of reliability issues over the period they own the vehicle.
Um, I'm not sure how you're concluding that CR is using ONLY RANKINGS (no need to shout it, even if it were true) to describe its annual survey of actual owners' reporting on incidents of reliability. 420,000 subscribers - like me -completed a survey of their make, model, and year and checked off boxes of areas in which problems arose. That's not a RANKING (as you write it). They appropriately call it a reliability survey (www.consumerreports.org/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/consumer-reports-car-reliability-faq/), and they do it annually, so I'm not sure why you're referencing 5, 7, or 10 year old vehicle reliability info being irrelevant when one is trying to research a 2020 vehicle. You can look at how the vehicle fared with owners during 2019, which is when all their current survey data were gathered. And CR states that vehicles lost almost half their value after three years, in which case five year old data may be highly useful for those looking to get the most for their money when shopping for a three year old model.
Also, it's crazy for you to posit as fact that "purchasers of ANY new vehicle in 2020 can expect to experience a VERY LOW incidence of reliability issues over the period they own the vehicle". The average owner keeps their car between six and seven years, and as the CR owners' survey makes obvious, lots of vehicles have lots of problems during that period.
@@pknutel1 For the record I'm a long-time CR subscriber and I dutifully fill out their annual survey about the vehicles I own each and every year. And when I'm in the market for a vehicle I consult the CR surveys. But that doesn't mean CR's survey is without significant problems. As noted in my original post, CR does NOT provide metrics on the actual incidence of problems; they only rank vehicles and brands relative to one another. And just like a horse race, the horse that wins a race may be ahead by a nose or by 17 lengths at the finish line. There's no difference in the rankings of the first and second place horse. Furthermore...
() CR touts its very large sample size in their surveys (400,000+). But volume doesn't compensate for sample bias and the CR survey is neither a scientific sample of individual vehicle owners nor even of their own subscribers. Unlike weighted random surveys where respondents are chosen to reflect known demographics rather than relying on volunteers, there is no way to determine the accuracy of a sample. CR publishes no information about any efforts to correct the responses to account for bias in demographics either for individual models or the bias compared to CR's readership.
() Even with its huge annual sample for all vehicles the number of responses for individual vehicles may be tiny. CR doesn't publish the number of respondents for each vehicle and individual models among those vehicles but one can be relatively certain that the number of CR respondents who own, say, a Dodge Durango SRT is tiny compared to those who own a Camry. And since only about 6% of Camry owners have a V6 model, even the relatively large but unscientific sample of Camry owners will only include a tiny minority of those owners, especially when the only respondents in the sample are CR subscribers who are even more likely to own 4 cylinder versions than the average of all Camry owners. (Based on the average age and presumed interest in fuel economy among CR respondents.)
() CR assigns a 100 point "score" for individual brands and models but that score is meaningful only for ranking brands and models relative to "average" vehicles in the same category, not as an indicator reflecting the number of actual problems. What does a score of 86 for one vehicle mean in relation to another vehicle with a score of 80? There's no way to tell from the data CR provides. CR claims that the scores for current models take into account the previous years' scores unless a model has been "significantly redesigned." But they provide no information about how significant redesigns are determined. Is a 2020 Toyota Highlander "significantly redesigned" compared to a 2019 model? Is a Honda Passport "significantly" different from a Honda Pilot when about only difference is the length of the vehicle and the number of seats? No way to tell by CR's published results. Was a 2019 KIA Sorento significantly "redesigned" when a completely new transmission was introduced? Was the Sorento significantly changed when the 4 cylinder NA engine was dropped and only the V6 was available in 2018 and after? Again, no way to tell.
() An examination of CR's ranking from one year to the next reveals considerable reordering of ranks from year to year. Toyota/Lexus vehicles usually retain their top spots but the ranking from 3 to 20 often shift noticeably, sometimes by four or more places. That suggests the actual reliability scores differ very little and are subject to sample bias changes as well as manufacturer changes that often go unannounced. Technical service bulletins (TSB's) and unannounced manufacturing changes often reflect corrections to problems a manufacturer is aware of but doesn't publicize. Such changes are invisible in CR's rankings.
() You point out that owners of older vehicles experience "lots of problems" if they own a vehicle for five to seven years. It's only logical that older vehicles exhibit more problems than newer vehicles. The same is true of people. But there's still no evidence that "LOTS of vehicles have LOTS of problems during that period." (Emphasis mine.) In fact, the incidence of problems in virtually all vehicles has dropped significantly over the last decade, not to mention over a longer period. When I was a kid a vehicle that managed to last 100K miles warranted a short news story in a local paper. Now vehicles that last half a million miles don't warrant such news.
() If you're truly interested in exploring the complexity and issues associated with reliability rankings, take a look at Alex on Autos discussion of the topic.
ruclips.net/video/BbbUvV6Py1o/видео.html
@@stephenhendricks103 When you say "CR does NOT [again with the shouting ;-)] provide metrics on the actual incidence of problems; they only rank vehicles and brands relative to one another", that's simply not true. They break down each car's reliability into 17 separate and distinct "trouble spots". For example, "Engine Major" includes engine rebuild or replacement, cylinder head, head gasket, turbocharger or supercharger, timing chain or belt, while "Engine Minor" includes accessory belts and pulleys, engine computer, engine mounts, engine knock or ping, fuel leaks, oil leaks. When two of the 550 owners of a 2019 Ford Fusion report they have an engine knock, it's unlikely that's an actual trouble spot and may instead be due to bad gas, etc. But if 450 of them report an engine knock, irrespective of whether there's even another car in their ratings, that would certainly be considered a trouble spot. Your horse race analogy doesn't apply; they're obviously reporting on the actual incidence of problems, but for the sake of readability (data presentation 101 here), they display these hard numbers in an easy-to-read format by grouping those numbers into five categories. And if they don't have enough data for a particular model for statistical significance, they rightly say so, which obviates the need to worry about sample sizes being too tiny.
Your attempt to pull demographics into your argument is similarly off, as we're interested here in how reliable a car is, not who the owner is. Demographics refers to statistical data relating to the population and particular groups within it, and for the purposes of determining whether that Kia on the showroom floor may or may not be a good investment, I don't think anyone cares about whether the person reporting the data above in their annual CR survey is black, white, or Hispanic. There's no "demographic bias" to correct for here, as it's irrelevant.
You also seem to be confusing CR's reliability rankings with their test scores. The former is far from perfect, but they're the best source of data on which cars have problems and what type - feel free to suggest a better source if you know of one. We've thus far been discussing reliability ratings based on owner surveys, and you then abruptly transition into an entirely separate topic. When you say "CR assigns a 100 point "score" for individual brands and models but that score is meaningful only for ranking brands and models relative to "average" vehicles in the same category, not as an indicator reflecting the number of actual problems. What does a score of 86 for one vehicle mean in relation to another vehicle with a score of 80? There's no way to tell from the data CR provides." If you want to know how problematic a car has been, you turn to the reliability ratings, not to a test score of 80 vs. 86. The test score, on the other hand, is an extremely rigorous testing procedure (www.consumerreports.org/cars-how-consumer-reports-tests-cars/) that also incorporates reliability data. Why? Because it would be disingenuous of CR to rate a car highly but not tell prospective buyers that the Tesla Model S with an amazing 0-60 time has also had significant problems. This is the caveat emptor that Car and Driver, Road & Track, and Motor Trend aren't in the business of telling you about. While their tests - like CR's test score - help you judge the performance of a vehicle, CR's score has the added value of including actual reliability reports from current and past owners.
You also say "CR claims that the scores for current models take into account the previous years' scores unless a model has been "significantly redesigned." But they provide no information about how significant redesigns are determined. Is a 2020 Toyota Highlander "significantly redesigned" compared to a 2019 model?" Um, well, the opening line for the 2020 Highlander review begins with "This all-new Toyota Highlander..." and then goes on to detail the features of this all-new model. I don't think anyone is confused about the "all-new" 2020 Highlander being a significant redesign. When a subtle redesign includes a refreshening of the front fascia and taillights, which is common (and always described as such, in CR and elsewhere), I think we can safely assume that prior test data about the car is still quite valid. So despite your "no way to tell" statement, CR's approach is perfectly logical, reasonable, and they transparently tell you what the extent of a redesign is whenever they review a car.
I'm not sure I understand your assumption about the shift in rankings for vehicles in the #3-#20 spots having very little to do with reliability scores. We've seen reliability scores drop dramatically (when, for example, Honda was caught years ago without an SUV and stupidly rebadged and sold an Isuzu Trooper as a Passport, with disastrous reliability results for years thereafter). Manufacturer TSBs and manufacturing changes - while often not widely known - would still be reflected in the owner reliability surveys a year after those changes are made. So whether done with great fanfare or not, if issues are addressed, owners are happier and would reflect that when completing their surveys.
Your penultimate point follows a rather odd logic. You had said that "The fact is that purchasers of ANY new vehicle in 2020 can expect to experience a VERY LOW incidence of reliability issues over the period they own the vehicle". My response was to point out the absurdity of that "fact". As the wealth of CR data shows, any hapless Fiat or Mitsubishi buyer is almost certain to experience significant reliability issues if they own their vehicle the average 6-7 years (you said the period they own the vehicle, so I was using the average time an owner keeps a new vehicle). I never said owners of older vehicles have more problems, because of course that's obvious (and then you mention that older people have more problems - um, OK, true as well). You then note that the incidence of problems across all vehicles has gone down in recent years and that many cars now often go 100K miles without many issues, both of which are obviously true as well, but are beside the point. Your original statement here about "ANY new vehicle" is patently false, and CR provides ample evidence to refute it.
@@pknutel1 I don't know how to put this more clearly but I'll try. When CR reports a rating of a vehicle (or its individual components) on a 5 point scale from "worse" to "better" than average that is a RANKING, not a metric reflecting the actual INCIDENCE of problems normalized by the number of vehicles sold. (Sorry to shout but you seem unable to understand the difference between a rank and an actual metric upon which the rank is based.)
Since you didn't get the horse race analogy here's another example that may help you. Line up a classroom of middle schoolers by height. The tallest kid in the class may be an inch taller than the next tallest or he/she may be 10" taller. Either way he's the tallest but the actual difference is either very small or huge. You cannot determine that simply by saying he/she is the tallest or that he/she is above average for the class as a whole.
CR apparently recognizes this issue. In their most recent survey the rank a total of 23 midsize mainstream SUV's. Of these 11 of the 23 earn a "Recommended" mark despite a range of "predicted reliability" ranging from the highest possible category to the middle rank on CR's five point scale. The implication? With very few exceptions, the reliability of these vehicles, recommended or not, does not differ greatly in terms of the actual number of problems despite their different rankings.
JD Power draws their weighted random samples from lists of purchasers provided by manufacturers rather than relying on volunteer CR respondents. It's a better (though hardly without problems) approach. Their 2020 survey of three year old vehicles indicate very, very few Genesis owners experienced even a single issue in three years of ownership. (0.94 issues) But the average number of issues experienced by owners of all other brands was less than 1.4. And JD Power takes into account issues that owners don't like as well as purely reliability problems. It's true that the JD Power surveys go back three years, not 6, 7, or 10 years of ownership. But there's no reason to believe that problems suddenly begin showing up in an atypical fashion over longer period of ownership. Automobiles, like people, age and develop problems but there's no reason to believe that one brand suddenly develops many more problems than another after, say, six years of ownership given equivalent mileage and maintenance.
The central problem with your argument is your use of terms like "many" or "lots" of problems or claiming that an owner of a particular vehicle is "almost certain to experience significant reliability problems if they own it for six or seven years" without ever attaching an actual metric to those terms. The data required for such metrics are very, very difficult, if not impossible, to obtain from manufacturers' proprietary sources. And without such data one is left to rely on the fact that most current brands most of the time are highly reliable.
@@stephenhendricks103 OK, I'll try to use simpler words and concepts from now on that perhaps even you'll be able to grasp. You haven't refuted anything I've pointed out with any facts yet, so I suppose we can take that to mean you've appreciated my helping you understand where you've been mistaken in our discourse thus far.
It's interesting that you've invented your own definitions of words to try to buttress your argument, so let me start there. First, let me try yet again to help you grasp what CR is doing with its reliability ratings vs. rankings, as I can see you're really struggling with these concepts and commingling their definitions. First, let's begin with the definition of ranking, vs. what you keep pretending you know but clearly do not. If you simply Google it, we can begin with this simple definition and example:
"a position in a scale of achievement or status; a classification.
"his number-one world ranking"
OK, so do you see the relative positioning of those numbers? First place is better than second place. That's a ranking. The numbers are what you see - they don't purport to represent anything else. One runner came in ahead of another; the former was in first place, and the latter, second place. That's a ranking. Are you with me so far?
The CR reliability ratings, on the other hand, do in fact represent real, hard data on a standard 1-5 scale. For example, the 2018 Genesis G90 rates a "1" on a 1-5 scale of reliability, where 1= "Worse" and 5 = "Better". Break this down into its underlying components by drilling down into the data further (note I said "data" - this isn't a ranking of who came in first or second place, it's a scale used to rate an aspect of the car) and you'll see it's had major reported problems by owners with its electrical systems. We know CR has the data, but they're trying to make it readable. Thus, that "1" might represent 1,000+ reported electrical system problems, whereas a "5" might represent 0-100 reported problems. The scale is representing, in a easy on the eyes format, hard data.
Now, regarding CR's 23 recommended midsize SUVs, it's interesting that you'd refer to weighting in your next paragraph but completely overlook it here. You're attempting to conclude that CR somehow disregards its own data on reliability in determining which car to recommend. In reality, it's using five measures (price, road test score, predicted reliability, predicted owner satisfaction, and MPG), all of which could be weighted equally or differently. Assuming the latter for a moment, reliability would count for 20% of the weight. The "issue" you attempt to illustrate CR "realizes" doesn't even exist. Four other factors - counting for the other 80% - are determining whether a car gets on the recommended list. Unlike that highly unreliable 2018 Genesis G90, these cars at least scored a 3, 4, or 5/5, so they were all at least fairly reliable, but these SUVs need to also do well in four other categories to make this cut. This is why your claim that "With very few exceptions, the reliability of these vehicles, recommended or not, does not differ greatly in terms of the actual number of problems despite their different rankings" is entirely baseless. 80% of the reason these cars are recommended is irrespective of their reliability. So it's a crazy illogical leap to infer that the reliability of the cars with ratings of 3 is somehow the same as those getting a 5 (?).
And while you continue to cite JD Power's survey and its approach to weighting, most others are less impressed by a survey that is purchased by car manufacturers. In this Autoblog post (www.autoblog.com/2016/02/25/jd-power-rethink-vehicle-dependability-opinion/), I think the headline and sub-head pretty much sum it up: ."J.D. Power needs to rethink its Vehicle Dependability Study
A poor Bluetooth pairing procedure is not the same as a blown engine." I think I'll stick with the scientists and engineers the non-profit Consumer's Union employs - and its $27M budget for testing and rating products - over John Powers' for-profit, tiny sample size, replete with problematic methodology survey.
Toyota Canada skipped the wireless phone charging on the XLE !!!!
do you know Tahoe hybrid highlander may not first
Plz. Improve the quality of the photos Ü use for showing other versions like the one at 2:14 @carconfections 🙏🏻
What's wrong with them exactly?
Unfortunately you cannot just open the glass without opening the whole back door.
W W Unfortunately, Toyota had to get rid of the useful feature because many incompetent owners didn’t know how to use it and complained endlessly that their vehicle was defective even if it wasn’t
@@artdelac what a shame smfh
53K and no power folding mirrors or entertainment center for the kiddos? Geesh!
Great review. However looks like your passenger is holding a chihuahua
Too much engine noise on the test drive. Toyota could have done better in that area. Big disadvantage at this price point for Platinum trim.
Actually, I have to correct myself to some extent. At 6.56 the fuel consumption shows 13.7 mpg, with 14 miles. Surely it is neither representative nor realistic, but this would be yet another reason to mention the actual fuel consumption.
We didn't drive the vehicle long enough to get an accurate read on real world fuel economy
@@CarConfections don't get me wrong! I do like your reviews. The Highlander gas vs. hybrid decision is probably all about fuel economy. The gas version is a bit more powerful, but based on your and some other videos it's not really noticeable. So, I guess it all comes down to difference in real mpg....
@@viktorkatona7521 you're right for sure. Hopefully we will get one for a week and then we can throughly test out the real world MPG's!
@@CarConfections Would be great. There is not a single review yet covering the real mpg of the new hybrids.
We have never seen over 21 MPG out of our 2016 Highlander Hybrid Platinum. A complete disappointment. Got better MPG out of our 6.1L Hemi on trips. And the problems we are having with it are never ending.
Fake news.
Is that David Spade?
Please CRV VS RDX.
Do you guys live in Canada?
No, in the U.S
@@CarConfections oh gotcha. I think I messed up my geography. The Frankfurt I was thinking was in Germany lol
yeah the mpg is great for a vehicle like this but a 2.5 L 4-cylinder engine is not. good luck driving up a hill with a car full of people.
totally agree ... same thought came to my mind as well
Is it available in Pakistan?
Nope
it is stylish!
Nice 3row
they seriously got rid of the rear window hatch?
randomrazr It was Toyota’s response to incompetent owners of previous models not knowing how to properly use the rear window hatch
What does 35Mpg means?
Miles per gallon
Must be v6 hybrid like a older generation
The 2019 looks 20x better
I love my 2020 Highlander XLE FWD GAS model....not a hybrid lover. I won't sacrifice engine power for gas mileage. But hooray to Toyota for those who want the SUV hybrid.
Kerri Dillon
hybrid is faster than gas version
@@DecemberMoonthe hybrid is not faster than the V6 engine. Hybrid pick up is dreadful by comparison, especially when there is waaaaay less horsepower.
@@kerridillon3120 I had the 2014 Highlander Platinum gas and now own the 2015 Highlander Hybrid Platinum. With the assist and torque of the two electric motors in the Hybrid, pickup is comparable between the gas and hybrid versions. Certainly you can get up to highway speed very quickly.
appleman59 , your older hybrid had a v6, this new one has 45-50 less hp than the v6 gas
53k? Rather get a Tesla and not deal with the maintenance headaches of these type of cars plus the fuel consumption. Just my personal opinion. Congratulations on everyone who bought one, good luck.
allfamyankee85 it’s a Toyota. No maintenance headaches - bulletproof reliability
车头很像斯巴鲁，车尾很像雷克萨斯
Not a bad car, but very expensive...
3rd row is a fail compared to Palisade.
I agree. I'm 5ft 8 and 280 lbs. I sat on the 3rd row of the Palisade and Telleride. Both has more leg room than the Highlander.
Phuong To no offense but the average 5 foot 8 person also isn’t 280 lbs.... for a average sized person, the third row in the highlander is just fine.
@@mattX5 I played college football. So I'm still a big guy. Just saying
Phuong To no, I was trying to say in the nicest way possible that someone who is 5ft 8 is usually around 100+ less pounds than you. I don’t mean that in an offensive way though. I’m just saying that is most likely why you don’t fit in the rear row of the highlander. I am 6ft 1 and 180 pounds and I fit okay in the third row of the highlander.
sanju2 I’m saying from a family perspective, people with kids that need in and out of third row daily. Hyundai is better. I have Highlander so I know.
I dropped out the moment I heard 4 cylinder and 50 less horse power.
Tf you plan on taking it to the drag strip?
agree ...same here ..... imagine with full load of passengers.. overtaking.. going up the hill.. would like someone to review these scenarios
That engine sound.......=\
40k + for a Toyota ，Acura mdx base 38k
this fully loaded highlander is nicer than a base mdx
Would you rather spend 50k+ on a highlander, or spend an extra 15K for a used Model X with 20-30k miles.
I love you
C’mon guys a nearly 26 minute video and you mention the sticker fuel economy not what you actually observed. I think you missed the point of the vehicle and an opportunity for an objective evaluation of the hybrid vs gas option. Gotta do better to get more subscribers and advertising
We didn't have the vehicle long enough to get an accurate read. When we have the vehicle for a longer amount of time, we will throughly vet the MPG
Ralph DeLatour You’re an absolute tool. Ever thought you need drive a car for slightly more than 5 minutes to get an accurate MPG number? It’s fairly obvious you only have a few brain cells, but try and use them next time so you don’t sound like a complete and utter moron.
What's a different between limited and platinum???? Do you know what only 5to 8 thousands. NOTHING ELSE !!!!! That interior ugly.
Push back sensation...?
Torque that pushes you back in the seat was what I was trying to describe
the 2019 highlander is better than this one!
Why ?
@@AliAuto101 the old highlander is better than this new highlander for 2020.
Bro give me a reason?
Better in what ?
Powertrain?
Is it better in design ?
Better in mpg ?
@@AliAuto101 uh... id say better in mpg??
@@AliAuto101 i guess?
Wow, that's pathetic! Ugly looking thing too!