Good morning! As it happens, we’re doing a Japanese car versus an Italian car again today, but we’ve jumped forward a couple of decades, and we’re looking at some much more practical vehicles. Fear not, though; there’s still some fun to be had. They’re both manuals.
So apparently, that Mazda 626 we looked at yesterday was a popular car on the internet. By complete coincidence, it was featured in That Other Daily Column over on That Other Site. Chances are we both found it via the same Facebook group. It put up a good fight, but the cool factor of its Alfa Romeo competition was just too much for it to overcome. The Milano came away with a comfortable win.
This would be a tough choice for me. I love Mazdas of that era; they’re great to drive, and very reliable. But the Alfa is, well, an Alfa. Do I really have another cantankerous project car in me, though? Might I be happier with a nice reliable Japanese classic? I think I would. I’m picking the Mazda, and leaving the Milano for someone younger and braver.
All right, let’s take a look at a couple of tall wagony things with stickshifts.
2003 Toyota RAV4 – $3,250
Engine/drivetrain: 2.0-liter DOHC inline 4, five-speed manual, AWD
Location: Seattle, WA
Odometer reading: 273,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
You know this car. You’ve rented one, or you know someone who has one. Or maybe you have one yourself. The Toyota RAV4 has gone from a quirky little mini-SUV to a ubiquitous family hauler. You see them everywhere, but what you don’t see very often is one like this – with a manual transmission.
It’s a Toyota, so of course it has a bazillion miles on it. The seller just recently bought it from the original owner, who is the one who piled on the miles. It has a new clutch, new brakes, new tires, and more, and it runs great. And it probably will continue to do so for another quarter-million miles, if you take care of it.
I don’t know what magical material Toyota makes its interiors out of, but this car does not look like it has 273,000 miles on it. It’s in remarkably good condition inside. I honestly don’t have much more to say about this car; it’s just a nice, reliable, practical car.
It’s almost perfect outside, too; is there a picture of this car in an attic somewhere, all dented and rusty? It’s the only explanation I can think of. There is some weirdness with the spare tire; it’s there in some photos and not in others. If it’s not there when you go to see it in person, I’d ask where it is.
2014 Fiat 500L Pop – $3,999
Engine/drivetrain: Turbocharged 1.4-liter OHC inline 4, six-speed manual, FWD
Location: Elizabeth, NJ
Odometer reading: 139,000 miles (or maybe only 116,000?)
Operational status: Runs and drives well
But maybe a RAV4 is too predictable for you. Maybe you’d prefer something with a little more flair. I thought the Fiat 500L was weird when it came out, but looking at it now, it’s kind of a neat little car. In fact, call me crazy, but there’s just a hint of Fiat Multipla in its profile. It’s not quite as weird, which is either a good thing or a bad thing, depending on how you feel about the Multipla.
The 500L came with several different engines in Europe, but as is typical, we here in the US only got the biggest and most powerful option, a 1.4-liter turbocharged four-cylinder. It drives the front wheels through a six-speed manual transmission. It’s being sold by a dealer, so there isn’t a whole lot of information in the ad, and there’s a question about the mileage. Two different mileages are listed, and the odometer isn’t visible in any of the photos to confirm it. They do say “Must drive to appreciate,” which I guess is positive.
Like the smaller 500, the 500L has a far more interesting interior than your typical economy car. What’s black and white and red all over? The inside of this car. It looks good, and it has a whole host of power options listed in the ad, but of course, no mention of how well it all works. You know the routine: push all the buttons before you buy, so you know what you’re getting yourself into.
The photos in the ad aren’t great, but the car does look like it’s in good condition outside. Those don’t appear to be the original wheel covers, though they’re similar in design. Personally, I hate plastic wheel covers, so I’d yank them off and just go with the steel wheels. Your mileage, of course, may vary.
Functionally, with the exception of the Toyota’s AWD, these two cars are about the same. They’ll both carry five people and some stuff, or two people and a bunch more stuff, and they’ll both get decent gas mileage doing it. One is practically a sure thing, but it’s a bit boring and predictable. The other is potentially less durable and reliable, but it’s got a lot more character and is probably more fun to drive. I know my choice, but it’s not up to me. Which one are you choosing?
Okay – I’ll take yesterday’s Alfa now.
Strangely enough I’m going with the Fiat. Why? I’m a crazy person first of all. But also, even though the Fiat is probably starting to rust, if I bring that minty RAV4 from Washington to the Northeast, it’ll go to shit almost immediately. There are NONE of these around here anymore. I see more first gens than this generation, and this is the case with many early 00’s Toyotas. This generation of RAV4 and the Echo especially, seemed to rot faster than anything without a Mazda badge on it.
OK, well on paper the Fiat has a better chance at continued trouble free life, simply because of miles and age. But it looks so weird, like a changli or Mirage. Why do they always for get to resize the wheels when they bloat a small car?
I am confused though, the hood scooped RAV’s were supposedly diesels? to fit the intercooler up there. It looks cool, but did they just swap the hood? or does this actually hide a pre-EGR choked diesel inside there? I would take the RAV either way though.
Those RAV4s aren’t boring. This is from when they were still lightweight and unusually nimble. It won’t be fast with that 2.0, but with the manual it would be a fun analog tactile car by today’s standards. And Toyota made their interiors out of unusually nice materials for the price point in the early aughts.
But there’s a limit to Toyota durability so I wouldn’t simply assume a 273K mile example is going to easily go another 50K let alone a quarter million.
The Fiat is tempting for the lower mileage and funky-fun interior design. But it’s nearly as slow as the old RAV4 in the instrumented tests I could find. With that laggy 1.4 turbo and ugly exterior looks I don’t see a ton of upsides.
I’ll go with the higher-mileage Toyota. This is from their golden years and isn’t just an appliance.
PNW Toyota or Joisey Fiat. Hmmmm….
I test-drove a manual 500L when they came out — only because FCA paid me (and anyone else with the coupon) $50 to do so. It made me wonder how much they would pay someone to actually buy one.
I’m RAVenous for the ‘yota today.
There’s currently a hole in my fleet, as I don’t have a winter capable vehicle; and the Rav 4 will handle that occasional use case for the rest of my life and fit in with my cockroachalike fleet of two Honda Civics.
Having driven a 500L with a manual – albeit with a 1.3L turbodiesel that sounded like gravel rattling around in a coffee can – I’ll take it. It was our first international rental car and we found it to be somewhat charming and useful. Certainly not the most attractive vehicle ever made, but you can’t see it while you’re driving, and the interior’s far nicer.
It was a far better vehicle than our second Italian rental, a Punto that we named Larry. Fucking Larry.
The 500L in white looks like an overgrown larva with the meat sweats. It’s a good thing cars like the Rodius exist to draw heat, otherwise people might realize how absolutely horrendous the 500L’s looks are. What an ugly, ugly car.
The rav4 is no looker either. That pigeon-sucker hood scoop on the schnoz is totally unneeded, but it gets my pick by virtue of being anything other than a 500L
I had one of those manual Ravs. Loved that car. Clutch was still flawless at 225K. Too bad a genuine idiot tried to pass five cars at once and totaled me in the process.
I sat in a 500L at an auto show, and the view out the front seemed weird to me. The extra window at the corner didn’t make the super thick A pillar any better.
Toyota for me.
The Rav4 will survive the apocalypse. Toyota today.
I’ll take the RAV4 because you can drive it another 100k miles and you’ll get your purchase price back from the next person you sell it to.
Toyotas are an addiction.
The RAV-4 is the correct choice. The thinking person will espouse the virtues of an unkillable powertrain, the cheaper price, “SUV with a stick!!!” And all that.
But it has too much ground clearance for my tastes, and it’s not a funky Italian mini-minivan, also with a stick. Am I setting myself up for pain? Maybe. Did I vote Alfa yesterday? Yes. 500L is my vote.