Caterham Project V vs Toyota RAV4
Caterham Project V
£80,000
Toyota RAV4
$35,699 – $36,450
AI Comparison Summary
Comparing Caterham Project V vs Toyota RAV4. Toyota RAV4 offers the strongest value on price. Caterham Project V leads on expert rating.
Category Winners
Overall Winner
Caterham Project V
Best Value
Toyota RAV4
Fuel Economy
Toyota RAV4
Performance
Caterham Project V
Toyota RAV4
4.7/10Visual Comparison
Category Radar
Price & Reviews
Model Year
Expert Rating
Caterham Project V
£80,000
Rating: 4.8/10
Toyota RAV4
$35,699 – $36,450
Rating: 4.7/10
| Specification |
Caterham Project V |
Toyota RAV4 |
|---|---|---|
| Brand | Caterham | Toyota |
| Model | Project V | RAV4 |
| Year | 2026 | 2026 |
| Type | Ev | — |
| Body Style | Electric Sports Coupe | Compact Crossover SUV |
| Current Price | £80,000 | $35,699 – $36,450 |
| MSRP | £80,000 | $36,450 |
| Dealer Price | £80,000 | $35,199 |
| Engine | Single Motor Rear-Wheel Drive | 2.5L Hybrid System |
| Horsepower | 272 hp (200 kW) | 236 hp (AWD net combined) |
| Torque | N/A | Hybrid system output (manufacturer managed) |
| 0–60 mph | Under 4.5 seconds (0-62 mph) | Approx. 7.0 sec (0-60 mph) |
| Top Speed | 143 mph (230 km/h) | Approx. 115 mph |
| Fuel Type | Electric | Hybrid |
| Mileage / MPG | N/A - Fully Electric | 40 MPG combined (AWD hybrid est.) |
| Range (EV) | 249 miles WLTP (400 km) | N/A |
| Emissions | 0 g/mi | ULEV/SULEV compliant (market dependent) |
| Battery | 55 kWh | Lithium-ion hybrid battery |
| Charging | 150 kW DC (15-80% in 15 min) | Self-charging hybrid (regenerative + engine) |
| Expert Rating | 4.8/10 | 4.7/10 |
| Community Reviews | 0 | 1720 |
| Performance Score | 9.5 | 8.5 |
| Comfort Score | 8.2 | 8.9 |
| Safety Score | 8.8 | 9.4 |
| Fuel Economy Score | 9.2 | 9.5 |
| Technology Score | 8.5 | 8.8 |
| Value Score | 8.9 | 9.2 |
| Pros | Class-leading low kerb weight of 1,190 kg; Agile rear-wheel drive handling dynamics; Fast 150 kW DC charging capability;... | Excellent hybrid fuel economy; Strong reliability and resale reputation; Comprehensive standard safety features; Practic... |
| Cons | Limited rear seating space in 2+1 layout; Targeted niche production volume; Real-world range constrained by lightweight... | Ride can feel firm on rough roads; Interior design is functional rather than luxurious; Higher trims increase cost quick... |
