AWD improvements

[Parkworker]

I would like to see an AWD indicator light on the instrument control panel that lets the driver know when the All Wheel drive System is engaged.

Also, it would be great if the AWD system could be operator activated like the 4 wheel drive systems in other vehicles.

[2RedV's]

I would like to see an AWD indicator light on the instrument control panel that lets the driver know when the All Wheel drive System is engaged.

Also, it would be great if the AWD system could be operator activated like the 4 wheel drive systems in other vehicles.

A light wouldn't be very helpful and would probably cause more perceived problems than it would be worth. The system turns on/off/on, etc. very rapidly and often when needed. You would essentially have a blinking light coming on which would confuse the average person who does not take the time to understand how the system works.

If it was a full-time (ala Subaru) system it would cost more, add additional complexity and weigh more, resulting in fewer MPG.

[wildwillie6]

A light wouldn't be very helpful and would probably cause more perceived problems than it would be worth.

I agree with all that, but is there any good way for me, the non-mechanic, to find out if all wheel drive is actually working? We've just had our first snow and our new-to-us 2001 CRV didn't seem very well "stuck to the road," compared with the older full-time awd Mitsu that it replaced. (And yes, I did check the VIN and it is a 4wd model.)

[SilverV]

It was our first significant snow of the winter in Chicago today, and also the first drive of my '07 CR-V AWD in the snow. I love it. I will never drive anything else but an AWD vehicle again. Just give it a little gas in some snow and you will know.:cool:

[Black Pearl]

and I don't really care other than curiosity. We have had some slick roads (although not heavy snow) and my driveway was icy the other night (I didn't realize it and almost fell down when I got out of the car). The Pearl just drove like it was a summer day. I can't say that I noticed anything other than it was not slipping or sliding. I put 4 winter tires on it, so I'm not riding on the standard tires.

[drivezki]

Also, it would be great if the AWD system could be operator activated like the 4 wheel drive systems in other vehicles.

Yes, it would be great. But the Real Time system is only designed for short periods of 4WD.


If it was a full-time (ala Subaru) system it would cost more, add additional complexity and weigh more, resulting in fewer MPG.

I would not neccessarily agree with that. There are several small SUV's that do have switches to look in 4WD. They don't cost more. But do use different drive systems. ie: Tucson, Escape, Suzuki, and more.

[2RedV's]

Yes, it would be great. But the Real Time system is only designed for short periods of 4WD.



I would not neccessarily agree with that. There are several small SUV's that do have switches to look in 4WD. They don't cost more. But do use different drive systems. ie: Tucson, Escape, Suzuki, and more.You forgot that the others weigh more (the 4x4 system, the V's adds 120 pounds, including the propellor shaft) and are more complex, which doesn't help in the long-term. The CR-V's system is extremely reliable. One hardly ever hears of failures, even in vehicles with over 200,000 miles.

[Greenzter]

You forgot that the others weigh more (the 4x4 system, the V's adds 120 pounds, including the propellor shaft) and are more complex, which doesn't help in the long-term. The CR-V's system is extremely reliable. One hardly ever hears of failures, even in vehicles with over 200,000 miles.
Hmm. Hardly ever? Why are you ignoring all those 2007's that had problems? Brand new vehicles. And the fact the many others are forced into having to change the rear fluid twice as often as Honda themselves specify? The RealTime 4WD is not perfect.

[2RedV's]

Hmm. Hardly ever? Why are you ignoring all those 2007's that had problems? Brand new vehicles. And the fact the many others are forced into having to change the rear fluid twice as often as Honda themselves specify? The RealTime 4WD is not perfect.The 07 issue is a fluke due to improper fluid having been put into them at the factory. Changing fluid, on ANY 4x4 is a necessity, not a choice. What is the suggested change interval on any of the other makes? 30k? 50k miles? We are back to comparing like to like then.

[miko]

Hey 2RedV's. Are you paid by Honda to make excuses for them or are you a volunteer? Fluke? Somebody opened the wrong can? At a company like Honda? My God.

And why did Honda themselves specify the incorrect maintenance mileage for hydraulic fluid changes for so many years? What's the fluke here? Some poor editor or proof reader lost his glasses?

Yes. "Changing fluid, on ANY 4x4 is a necessity, not a choice". When the manufacturer says to do it. Not twice or three times as often.

[2RedV's]

Hey 2RedV's. Are you paid by Honda to make excuses for them or are you a volunteer? Fluke? Somebody opened the wrong can? At a company like Honda? My God.

And why did Honda themselves specify the incorrect maintenance mileage for hydraulic fluid changes for so many years? What's the fluke here? Some poor editor or proof reader lost his glasses?

Yes. "Changing fluid, on ANY 4x4 is a necessity, not a choice". When the manufacturer says to do it. Not twice or three times as often.Wow. You sure are angry. Fluid changes too much for you?

I truly believe Honda blew it when they specified 90k miles between changes. However, the manual for many of those years (not in the 07 manual, BTW) also states that is for "normal driving" and also states that deep water crossings require additional changes. The manual is a guide, not a bible.

If you change your engine oil more often than what the manual says, you have no business complaining about any other fluid change interval, do you? :)

[tsmithvt]

I would ask why some owners have so little trust in Honda's RT4WD System. I thought that the idea was to take some of the effort and distractions out of driving in adverse conditions. The VSA System is another example of a system designed to ease driving when things get bad. Of course, none of these systems are perfect.

At the risk of sounding like a paid Honda representative, I will say that, for the most part, the RT4WD System is an extremely clever and well thought out system. It does a lot of the thinking for the driver. What I particularly like about the way the RT4WD System works is that the CR-V remains basically a FWD vehicle until 4WD is needed and then it only feeds the torque required (to the rear wheels) to keep the slip rate of the front wheels reasonable. What this means is that a V will continue to follow its nose when things get slippery. In addition, the system is all mechanical (hydromechanical logic and mechanical components).

The system, while not perfect, has proven basically reliable over ten years of service. As a Mechanical Engineer (38 years), I wish I had thought of it.:rolleyes:

[2RedV's]

I would ask why some owners have so little trust in Honda's RT4WD System. I thought that the idea was to take some of the effort and distractions out of driving in adverse conditions. The VSA System is another example of a system designed to ease driving when things get bad. Of course, none of these systems are perfect.

At the risk of sounding like a paid Honda representative, I will say that, for the most part, the RT4WD System is an extremely clever and well thought out system. It does a lot of the thinking for the driver. What I particularly like about the way the RT4WD System works is that the CR-V remains basically a FWD vehicle until 4WD is needed and then it only feeds the torque required (to the rear wheels) to keep the slip rate of the front wheels reasonable. What this means is that a V will continue to follow its nose when things get slippery. In addition, the system is all mechanical (mechanical logic and mechanical components).

The system, while not perfect, has proven basically reliable over ten years of service. As a Mechanical Engineer (38 years), I wish I had thought of it.:rolleyes:I also once had a 1999 Isuzu Trooper with an almost similar system. It was rear wheel drive until slippage was detected and then added torque to the front wheels. It did, however, have a 2 speed transfer case as well. It also got all of 17 mpg HWY with the V6 and was much heavier than a CR-V.

[Greenzter]

The 07 issue is a fluke due to improper fluid having been put into them at the factory. Changing fluid, on ANY 4x4 is a necessity, not a choice. What is the suggested change interval on any of the other makes? 30k? 50k miles? We are back to comparing like to like then.

Honda blew it big time with the early 2007 units. They waited for the owners to hear noise, then fight it out with their dealers, and many even had to call Honda directly. The right thing would have been to notify the buyers of the production dates in question and have them return to the dealers for a check/fluid replacement/parts replacement. Or whatever.

Now as to frequency of fluid changes, that is a weird one. On my 2006, I heard the noise at 19K miles. Yes. Only 19K. Never been in deep water or abused the vehicle in anyway. Dealer changed it for free. But it's not the cost, it's the damn principle.

The CR-V's maintenance schedules have been incorrect from the very beginning. 1997 to 2006. 10 years. There is no excuse for that. None. Now, with that fancy automated system we don't know when the requirement to change will appear. We've seen many posts that rear end noise on 2007's after several thousand miles is not uncommon.

Just imagine if you would hear strange mechanical noise, like pistons scraping, from your engine after only 1 or 2 thousand miles after doing an oil change. Would not make you happy, would it? Oh wait. Did you not use Honda motor oil? BS. Same with the rear end.

Mine works fine now. But for how long? I'm an average driver, using the extreme service schedules for all maintenance.

I'm not a mechanical engineer. But something is not right here. Every other fluid in the world is duplicated by someone else. But no, not Honda's Dual Pump fluid. It's sacred. Nothing else will work. Well, I say it's not the fluid's fault. It's the design of that rear end.

And that's all I have to say on this subject. :D

[drivezki]

Wonder why Honda chose not to use the much discussed Real Time system on Pilots. And trucks. And Acuras. And ATVs. Are we as CR-V owners uniquely blessed? ;)

:confused:

[noahrexion]

Pilot has an entirely different set of cars to compete with (all of which have a "more" permanent AWD/4WD system). It is also, bigger, heavier and gets worse gas mileage :)

Remember this started off from a Civic base. It really is "small" in comparison to other CUV/SUV's and has stayed relatively true to its car-like, small, light (though everything seems to get progressively heavier except the corvette) weight roots; that is a plus.

As for Honda not getting it right, I definitely agree with that. Honda built its reputation well, admittadly I have owned 7 Hondas in the last 8 years, but it has not been great in the last 2-3 IMO.

I sold my 2007 Civic Si Sedan about 3 weeks ago and bought my V. The "types" of problems CR-V's are having (new ones) is something thats happening across the board with Honda (actually with Toyotas too). Spend a little time on any messageboard and internet and other cars problems will become self evident. Albeit, forums are generally receptacles for peoples "issues" with cars and there is a VERY few % of actual car owners that use forums. Honda quality IMO (build quality) has slimmed.

[tsmithvt]

Honda blew it big time with the early 2007 units. They waited for the owners to hear noise, then fight it out with their dealers, and many even had to call Honda directly. The right thing would have been to notify the buyers of the production dates in question and have them return to the dealers for a check/fluid replacement/parts replacement. Or whatever.

Now as to frequency of fluid changes, that is a weird one. On my 2006, I heard the noise at 19K miles. Yes. Only 19K. Never been in deep water or abused the vehicle in anyway. Dealer changed it for free. But it's not the cost, it's the damn principle.

The CR-V's maintenance schedules have been incorrect from the very beginning. 1997 to 2006. 10 years. There is no excuse for that. None. Now, with that fancy automated system we don't know when the requirement to change will appear. We've seen many posts that rear end noise on 2007's after several thousand miles is not uncommon.

Just imagine if you would hear strange mechanical noise, like pistons scraping, from your engine after only 1 or 2 thousand miles after doing an oil change. Would not make you happy, would it? Oh wait. Did you not use Honda motor oil? BS. Same with the rear end.

Mine works fine now. But for how long? I'm an average driver, using the extreme service schedules for all maintenance.

I'm not a mechanical engineer. But something is not right here. Every other fluid in the world is duplicated by someone else. But no, not Honda's Dual Pump fluid. It's sacred. Nothing else will work. Well, I say it's not the fluid's fault. It's the design of that rear end.

Well…..of course you are quite right. You make good points and state them well. I agree that Honda could have handled the RT4WD fluid change issue a LOT better and a LOT sooner. I can only guess (no actually I can’t) as to why Honda has never, simply changed the maintenance schedule to reflect the 30K fluid change. I’m guessing that most people, yourself probably included, would have easily accepted the revised (current unofficial) fluid change schedule.

As to why the RT4WD System is in CR-Vs and Elements and not other 4WD vehicles in the Honda line, only Honda Engineering knows the answer to that question. Typically access to the Engineering Departments of major corporations is highly restricted and not even the Automotive Media gets past Public Relations Departments. I would put forward the guess that it might have something to do with vehicle weights, cost and intended uses. It could also be as simple as different engineering groups going their own way. I would also point out that many other manufacturers use different 4WD systems in different vehicles in their lines. Subaru uses different systems depending on the vehicle’s transmission (manual or auto). Jeep uses different systems based on the vehicle’s intended use. Some companies offer different 4WD system options just to provide options.

[Black Pearl]

And well put tsmithvt. I really want to believe that the Honda system is good. I don't care if it is the best in the world. I didn't buy my Honda to go off roading...I wouldn't have bought a CR-V for off roading. I bought it because I thought it offered extreme reliability. I don't care when we have to change the oil. Simply state the honest figure. The owners manual should be the bible and not a guideline, (obviously not including severe service).