Comments by "Stephen Hendricks" (@stephenhendricks103) on "" video.

@ALMX5DP As noted in another comment, that common defense has several shortcomings. Children come in a variety of sizes and most have an annoying habit of growing larger over a relatively short period of time.
2
No. It's fully baked. It may not be at the top of the 3 row category but it provides far more cargo space than the CX-9, an excellent V6 engine, a more modern 8 speed transmission, and a hybrid option. All in a package that's almost half a foot less in length than the bloated CX-9. All reasons that the CX-9 is at the very bottom of all mainstream three row SUV's in terms of sales. And not by a little but by a huge amount.
2
@ShafinRehman The issue you raise is a common one in the Toyota lineup. Their business model depends on the brand's reputation for reliability rather than interior quality or innovation. Whether that reputation stands up to scrutiny versus some other brands is questionable but as a business model for profit generation it works quite well.
1
@ALMX5DP Not fine for my "teenager," a rather petite 15 year old who at about 5 ft tall would find it unacceptably cramped. The Highlander provides 27.7" of third row legroom. A VW Atlas and a Chevy Traverse each offer half a foot more! And virtually every other competitor offer more than 31". Even a KIA Sorento, half a foot less in length than the Highlander (189" vs 195") provides 4" more legroom in the third row. In fact, the Highlander and the Mazda CX-9 are the ONLY midsize crossovers with less legroom than a Ford Mustang's backseat. (30"). Of course minivans provide more third more room but the Highlander offers significantly less room than any other mainstream midsize SUV. It shines only in comparison to the Lexus RX-L with a ridiculous 23.5" of legroom. And to add insult to injury, Toyota puts 3 seat belts in the back seat in order to claim the Highlander seats 7 or 8 passengers depending on the configuration of the second row. It's advertising malpractice.
1
There are more than 20 mainstream midsize SUV's divided between two row and three row entries with most brands offering one of each. So what makes a consumer choose a 3 row vehicle? Presumably it's the value of a third row for at least occasional, if not regular, use. The Highlander offers 27.7" of rear seat legroom. The Toyota and Mazda CX-9 are the ONLY three row SUV's that provide less legroom in the back than the rear seat of a Ford Mustang (30"). Every other competitor in the mainstream category provides more than 31" of legroom. The typical defense for such a cramped space is that the 3rd row is meant for "kids." But there are some significant problems with that claim. First, very small children and infants shouldn't be consigned to the third row for safety reasons in the event of the all too common rear end collision. Second, installing/removing child seats from the Highlander is more awkward than a number of other vehicles. So for each of these reasons very small family members aren't good candidates for the third row. Finally and most importantly, as parents know well children have an annoying habit of growing. So while a nine year old may find the rear seat acceptable, that same kid three years later may well have to be bound and gagged to be crammed into the space. (A sometimes tempting but not recommended and probably illegal tactic.) Toyota's well earned reputation for long term durability and reliability loses significant value if three years after a new Highlander's purchase it's no longer adequate as a "family hauler" even when the number of family members is the same. As if this weren't bad enough Toyota makes the absurd claim that the Highlander is a "seven or eight passenger" depending on whether captain chairs or a bench is installed in the second row. That claim is based on the fact that Toyota installs three seat belts in the third row. Really??? At best it's "marketing speak" that assumes Munchkins from Oz are the human beings in question. At worst (and more accurately) it's simply false advertising. In reality the top trim Highlander is a four person midsize SUV with an MSRP well over $50,000. Spend less for a less expensive and less well equipped lower trim model with a bench seat and it's a five passenger SUV. So why don't consumers who want a midsize Toyota SUV opt for a two row model if they don't need/want a largely useless third row? Simple. Currently there's no such vehicle. That's a hole in Toyota's lineup. And their forthcoming Venza suggests they recognize the problem. That should alleviate the problem if (a) the Venza is significantly less expensive than the Highlander and (b) a buyer wants a hybrid Venza since that's the only drive train available. The popularity of the RAV4 and Highlander hybrids suggest the latter may not be much of an issue but those hoping to get much of a price break for the Venza compared to the Highlander are likely to be disappointed if the MSRP's of the Honda Passport vs the Pilot and VW Cross Sport vs the Atlas are any guides. Toyota has undeniably improved their long-in-the-tooth Highlander compared to the last generation. But as a three row SUV, it's still sadly lacking.
1