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?
It’s possible I am the only Autopian commenter who has actually owned a 2014 500L, so let me tell you all about it. MPVs are extinct in the USA (to the extent that they were ever here to begin with), and the uniquely-sized 500L fit my needs perfectly at the time. You can fit a shocking amount of people and stuff into one of those.
The 1.4t/DCT combo in my Trekking model was massively more fun than any competing car I looked at. I had been following the Fiat forums carefully, and was aware of early issues with the DCT. I bought a remaining 2014 model in early 2015 with the knowledge that multiple TSBs had been applied by that time. The dealer gave me $5k off the price just for walking in the door.
For being a bulbous, rather slab-sided thing, the 500L was rock-solid on the highway. I never felt crosswinds the way I did with previous cars (such as the Nissan Rogue & Dodge Journey), and it was sure-footed with zero body roll. It’s true that even when it comes to “family cars”, the Europeans have handling dialed-in compared to US and Asian makes.
In three years of ownership, I never experienced one problem with my car, save for a prematurely dead 12V battery. (As always, the OEM battery was junk.) I only traded it when my family grew rather unexpectedly. The 500L remains my favorite car I’ve ever owned.
Sorry, the 500L is just too… too… well, you know. Though I really want the in-car espresso maker for it.
I chose the Rav4 of course, my mom raised no dummy! 😉
500L but I have to go to Italy get the espresso machine accessory. While there I will go over to a Renault dealer and grab the baguette holder. I’m looking at Fiats and voted alfa yesterday…one would think that the politics we are barely surviving through would be enough pain and stress, yet here I am, a non wrencher dreaming of Fiats. Full disclosure, while in France a couple of years ago we rented a 500 and it was more fun than it should have been. 3 tickets were sent to me via the rental agency upon my return to theses United States.
The Italian option isn’t fun enough to want. If the price is negotiable, the Rav4 could be a better winter car.
Rav4 for sure it will just keep going and be nice to drive. Maybe need some valve cover gaskets and a $10 OEM pcv valve. Fiat will do MultiAir and electrical things at the very least.
Toyota for me. I’m in Europe so rarely vote in these. The Toyota is dull, dull, dull but I rented an identical 500L to this and absolutely hated it. Luckily the scenery around Italy, Slovenia, Austria and Croatia made up for it.
I never quote figured out how they produced a car that seems at once 90% glass and 90% blind spot.
This was easy too-Rav4! It will run forever and will be fun to drive w/ stick. That Fix It Again Tony has an ugly as hell body style and I’ve never been interested in them. The yota would be a great daily
So, a couple years ago, my regular car blew a radiator and was in the shop and my wife’s friend let me borrow her 2001 Highlander. It had tons of miles and the radio would come on and off on each bump and her son had “fixed” the air conditioning, which meant that it would occasionally turn on a fan if you bumped it just right (likely same sort as the radio).
I was 100% ready to loath it. And found I loved it. There was something insanely simple and honest about the old thing. Visibility was insanely good. It actually had steering feel (which I swear it didn’t when new). It was a vehicle that told you what was going on and what it was doing all the time. It made me miss the old days of driving when you actually worked with a vehicle to do things. I don’t know how to describe it, but honest.
I’ll bet money the Rav4 is like that, only with even more of that honest feel because of lighter weight and row your own transmission.
It’s one of those things that in 2003, it would have been a vanilla drive, but in 2026, with all that we have lost with vehicle feel, I expect it to be a really nice driving vehicle and shockingly fun.
So, based on how a Highlander of similar years/age drove, I went with the Rav4.
I swear Highlanders have gotten better with age. I bought a hybrid because it was cheaper then a Prius and then kept buying them cheaper and cheaper they are just so good and have aged well. I don’t really understand why they drive so well but they do. I used to hate the design but now think it’s pretty decent looking and really goes back to that early to mid 2000s peak Japanese design. The HVAC controls are their biggest issue. I always have to spray them with electrical cleaner and resolder them sometimes. Apparently they have to be the exact part number to switch them and there are several. The drivers window switch is the same but they seem to hold up ok.
Rented a 500L in Italy for a long road trip and loved it. TONS of space, fun to drive, felt very solid and averaged 53 mpg with the excellent 1.3 TD engine we didn’t get here. I’m suer it would be a hoot with the Abarth’s engine and a stick.
I’m going with the RAV4. The ad seems more honest and it’s a bit cheaper.
I’m begrudgingly going with the Fiat. 273k is a lot of miles, even for a Toyota, and I was never a big fan of the styling of that era of Rav4. The Fiat looks better and is in better condition top to bottom
I own a 500L six speed and it’s a great car! It’s more fun to drive than a RAV4, with a much better and larger interior. The looks are a bit odd, but the Trekking package really helps. Sadly, the early automatic transmission was a disaster, and it gave this whole generation of Fiat a bad reputation they don’t deserve.
I love those 2nd gen RAV4s. Back when they were still “cute utes”.
I would never have anything even remotely RAV4ish so it’s begrudgingly the Fiat by default
I sat in a Fiat 500L once and didn’t really care for it overall, but the split A-pillars are brilliant and more automakers should use them.
You really should put that RAV4 up against a series of Stellantis products with declining mileage so we can see the point at which people are willing to buy one. Does the Fiat win out at 75,000? 50,000? Not even at brand new (that poor Hornet never had a chance…)?
The Rav4 having missing components in some pictures and not in others is not giving me good vibes. And missing the cover on the front of the driver’s mirror is pushing me to roll the dice on the newer and lower mileage Fiat.
The Showdown has given me an appreciation for Fiat 500s, but the L isn’t ugly enough to enjoy. I went with the RAV4; at least it’s an older generation with some identify left.
I love the looks of that RAV4 generation, and I don’t love this specific Fiat … but I’ll take the Fiat. Also, non-humble brag, I got to learn how to drive stick on an Alfa-Romeo Milano as a teenager! Yes I sure did stall it in the middle of intersections, but I think i’ve earned the right to choose the weird little italian car!
The RAV4 had a shot with the stick, but wtf is up with the hood scoop? And that steering wheel gives me the willies. Pass.
Yeah, that hood scoop is a head scratcher. Maybe it’s a speed hole.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=homer+speed+hole#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:2db5d88d,vid:MrKyZZQbANE,st:0
The scoop is factory. Part of the CV Sport Pack. Just appearance mods
https://www.carsales.com.au/editorial/details/buying-used-toyota-rav4-2000-06-26921/
Weird, it’s so shitty looking.
Rav-4 Please.I’ll probably have to add a quart of oil every other fill up but it’s still going to be more reliable than a Fiat with half the miles.
On this 2.0-liter? I thought the oil consumption issue affected the later 2.4-liter.
Voted with my heart yesterday, so it’s back to boring and practical (and less expensive) me today. I know that ubiquitous thing will be an embarrassment to be seen in, but it’ll get me hither and yon. And the $749 extra in my theoretical pocket will cover its likely maintenance costs for years.
I’m going with the stickshift Toyota today. Why? That AWD system is darn capable. Having taken a larger AWD 3rd gen one places that it by all rights had no business going, this lighter 2nd gen will be a billy goat in comparison. While it’s minty, it’s my car and I’ll do what I want. Besides, pinstripes add character!
I’ve always been wary of the use of turbocharging on daily drivers. I view it as another eventual expense when anything turbo related takes a dump. On a non daily drivers, no problem. At least it doesn’t have the problematic ZF 9-speed, as fitted to the 500x and other vehicles. It’s got a real manual.
Turbos have become so ubiquitous in the last 15 years, they really are not the #1 concern for reliability.
I have a 2015 Mini with BMW’s B48 2L four turbo and it’s getting close to 100k miles. The only issues I’ve had are the engine mounts were replaced and I need to replace the rear suspension bump-stops.
I also have a 2016 Volvo with a 2L four turbo and it has had a few more issues. The worst was oil consumption which was apparently a known issue and addressed with an engine rebuild (new pistons and rings, the turbo is still original) that was done at Volvo’s expense, and their stupid oil trap replacement for the far more reliable PCV valve has needed replacement twice in just over 80K miles.
While I’d be a little leary of Fiat’s reliability in general, the turbo is unlikely to be the first thing that strands you on the roadside.
As a Toyota owner, I only need one, give me the Italian car for a second day in a row.