Update: Watch the 2015 Toyota RAV4 beat Forester, Cherokee and CR-V in snow

Ah what tires?
Ah traction control on or off?
Etc.

There's been discussion about this video on other sites. The problem with it is simple - they don't actually say that it's a fair and unbiased test. Even assuming that all the cars have their factory issue tires (which is NOT said - so was the Rav a new car with new tires, and the Forester a model year older with tires that already have 20,000 miles on them?) - the actual video shows that in the braking portion, they didn't run the cars on the same surface. At the point where brakes were applied, the Forester is following in the tire tracks of another vehicle. The tracks Rav was following turn off, so now the Rav is in fresh snow - which means that the Rav WILL have better traction and braking.

All valid concerns. Here is the website of the company that performs these tests:
http://www.amcitesting.com/index.html
The company offers this if it makes you feel better: "As proof of the unassailable substantiation services we offer, no ‘AMCI Testing-Certified’ competitive claim has ever been retracted due to a legal challenge- a record that spans nearly 30 years."

Call me skeptical. Is this a test of the vehicles capabilities or which comes stock with the best tires for this test? The braking distances between them is what make me believe it was a flawed test. Run the test with the same snow tires on each vehicle and the results will most likely be a lot different. Shame on Toyota.

I have a '14 Rav LE AWD and let me say it has been confidence inspiring to drive in one of the worst Northeast winters in memory. My biggest complaint with it is the busy ride (with too frequently harsh impact absorption). Getting 24.6 MPG overall in 60/40 city to highway driving.

It appears that AMCI testing knew who was paying for the test. In other words, this was not blind testing, or they would have stated such, so that alone makes it invalid. In a valid test, the testers would have no idea who paid for the test, or whose product they were testing. Also they never stated that the cars were tested with OEM equipment, so they could have been modified.

Nothing is said about tires, so perhaps snow tires were put on the RAV4 and summer tires on the others. Nothing was said about tire pressures either, so perhaps the ones on the RAV4 were optimized and the others deoptimized.

It makes sense for manufacturers to supply cars with 3 season tires that are quiet, get good gas mileage, and perform decently on warm pavement. Someone with specific needs will buy tires specific to those needs. All my cars have winter tires mounted on their own wheels, so I personally prefer buying a car with tires biased toward warm weather driving, since they will not be on the car during the winter. I would not like the RAV 4 if the tires that gave decent winter performance were noisy and poor handling during the summer.

As to no claim being retracted due to a legal challenge. That is meaningless. Any smart company would retract a claim under threat of a legal challenge, before that legal challenge is ever made.

As to a legal challenge, suppose Subaru threatened one. AMCI might report that Toyota supplied them with several vehicles, prescribed the method of testing, and then AMCI tested them. They might say that they had nothing to do with choosing tires, tire pressures, or even verifying the condition of the vehicles prior to testing. That was all Toyota's decision, based on their contract with Toyota. So, if Toyota rigged the vehicles, that was not AMCI's problem. They were paid to test and that is all they did.

I hope that the other companies get together and research this testing and debunk it. I hope Toyota takes it on the chin, same as Volvo did years ago when it was found they reinforced the roof on the bottom car in the commercial where they had 4 cars placed one one on top of another.

I have worked for a number of carlines and AMCI is legit. The manufacturer knows they have an advantage and they get AMCI to certify it. AMCI is contracted to do the test and certify the result. They are not called to affect the results. I worked for Dodge and they were using AMCI to show the strength of the Caravan that particular time. The advantages shown by the RAV4 accent the six speed transmission advantage, the vehicle stability control and the balance of the car. Subaru kind of takes it on the nose in this one which is ironic because Toyota owns fifteen percent of Subaru.

If this testing is legitimate, then AMCI should have no trouble publishing the details of the test. In other words:

1. From whom and at what mileage each vehicle was purchased.
2. How each vehicle was prepared and by whom (AMCI, Toyota, or the dealer from whom they were purchased.) For example did AMCI test a random RAV4 off a lot, or one that was tweaked by Toyota in preparation for the test?
3. This is the most important. Is AMCI willing to attest that nobody involved in the testing at any level know that Toyota was paying for the test? If anyone knew, then the test is meaningless.

Randy Brooks, please tell us how you know "AMCI is legit." Are you guessing, the same as you are by saying the 6 spd automatic is an advantage? The Forester is 0.3 seconds faster to 60 according to Consumer Reports (8.7 versus 9.0 sec) and the Forester gets better gas mileage 26 mpg overall in Consumer Report testing versus 24 for the Rav4. The EPA also rates the Forester considerably better in fuel economy. The engines are very similar in displacement, torque, and horsepower. The Subaru is further disadvantaged by being a full time all wheel drive, while Toyota prides itself as being front wheel drive and more fuel efficient until there is slippage. I would say the facts point to a superior CVT transmission in the Forester, particular since the 2013 model with the old transmission (but mostly everything else the same) was slower and more thirsty.

Having worked with Subarus I can notice that the Traction control was not deactivated on the Subaru. With the Traction Control active, it will limit acceleration when it detects wheel spin. This means you can have your throttle at 100% and it will not give you 100% acceleration until wheel spin has been controlled. Further more it activates brakes on individual tires until they are all spinning at the same speed. when you deactivate the Traction Control (as is instructed to do so in snow driving in the manual) the engine management system of the Traction Control is deactivated. As with any low friction surface you do not want to lose momentum so deactivating the Traction Control is necessary to keep forward movement. snow, mud and sand dune driving) This Subaru is obviously not accelerating due to loss of traction and Traction Control not being deactivated. We can deduct one of two possible scenarios. 1 the Toyota's Traction control was deactivated and the Subaru was not. Or Toyota's traction control was not deactivated and is a system that does not incorporate some kind of engine and throttle management to control loss of traction.

So, the RAV4 comes with better all season tires. Until ALL vehicles are shod with the same tires, this is a tire test and nothing but a tire test. Anyone drawing anything from this, other than the performance of the different rubber, is making a HUUUGE assumption. Any test, to be valid, must control for variability. This test, if to be a comment on respective AWD systems, and braking ability, did not control for variability (tires), this was a tire test, full stop.

The problem with this test... no, the problem of Subaru really, is that they put pathetic tires on the Forester. With equivalent tires the Forester likely would have done better than the other two. As it stands this is more a test of the tires than the vehicles.
Understood this is a test of the vehicle as delivered, but it gives the implication that the RAV4 is actually a better vehicle... which it might or might not be. No way to tell because this is more a test of the tires not the actual cars.

Interesting given that Consumers Reports also did winter testing last year and their results were exactly the opposite: the Forester handled and stopped best in the snow, the CR-V was midpack, and the RAV4 was worst staying on the snowy road (would frequently plow in turns). CU is known to be objective and sticklers for testing accuracy.

I own a 2016 Rav 4 with less than 2000 miles. The all-seasons on my RAV suck. I will have to put on snow tires to get through the snow safely next season for sure. They are borderline now brand new, which is concerning. OEM tires = garbage on ANY brand.

This is completely contradictory to Consumer Reports testing of the CR-V, Rav4, Forester.

Are you kidding me, who the heck can you believe?
At least the CR testing - they used the same tires on each vehicle.

I have a subscription to Consumer Reports who tested the CRV, Rav4, and the Forester. The Rav4 came in dead last! I think that I'll trust CR to produce unbiased results! At least they used the same tires on each vehicle! I run winter tires here in Canada on my Rav4 because all seasons tires are garbage in snow and ice.