Model Year | 2010 | 2012 | |
Model | Toyota RAV4 | Chevrolet Spark | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | |||
Difference | |||
Total Legroom | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in |
2010 Toyota RAV4 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2009 | 4dr SUV 269-horsepower 3.5L V6 5-speed automatic AWD |
Easy access for us older folk and plenty of room once we get there. see full Toyota RAV4 review |
2010 Toyota RAV4 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2011 | 4dr SUV 179-horsepower 2.5L I4 4-speed automatic AWD |
back seat is hard, not much leg room see full Toyota RAV4 review |
2010 | 4dr SUV 179-horsepower 2.5L I4 4-speed automatic AWD |
no lumbar support see full Toyota RAV4 review |
2009 | 4dr SUV 269-horsepower 3.5L V6 5-speed automatic FWD |
Harder seats than in the Murano, and now in a good way. The Murano has power lumbar support, letting you melt in the seat as much as you wish. Better lateral support in the Murano as well. see full Toyota RAV4 review |
2012 Chevrolet Spark Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Comment | |
2013 | Actually, just room. The firm, thinly padded rear seat provides minimal comfort. But there's more rear legroom than in quite a few larger cars. A Ford Focus, two size classes up, offers two fewer inches. Chevrolet's own Cruze offers just a few tenths of a inch more. see full Chevrolet Spark review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2012 Chevrolet Spark.