Honda finally got CR-V just right [4.27.7]

[T Mac]

For more than 10 years, the Honda CR-V has seemed to be a work in progress, a bit like a gangly and awkward kid. Now, like that kid who grew up to be graceful and articulate, the CR-V has finally hit its stride -- with the new redesign for the 2007 model, it has smoothed itself out, both aesthetically and in the essentials of what makes the car's occupants feel at home, feel comfortable.

By Michael Taylor, Chronicle Auto Editor

Click here to read the entire review from San Francisco Chronicle

[drivezki]

One of the features I like on this forum. Many reviews.

Some I agree with, and some.................

[Greenzter]

Using this guy's definition, Honda got it right since day 1.

But I also enjoy reading the many reviews.

[Parkworker]

My favorite styling was the 2000 model, I'm not a fan of the 2007 CR-V

[Black Pearl]

The 07 CRV didn't do so well on Consumer Reports coming in 5th behind the v-6 Rav 4, the Santa Fe, 4cyl Rav 4, & Subaru Forester. Yet for reason it is doing # 1 in sales. I compared all of the top except the Santa Fe and found them unattractive in one fashion or another. But the biggest factor was that I heard the angels sing (somewhat of an exaggeration) when I sat in the CR-V and heard nothing when I sat in the others. The Subaru was nice technically but it just looks like an oversized station wagon. The Rav 4, I just plain didn’t like. It has a very plastic look about the tail especially the spare tire—which I didn’t like either. I am somewhat ashamed to say that I bought the CR-V because it felt right. I am mystified by Consumer Reports. The Rav 4 I believe got an 84 to the CR-V’s 72.

I like reviews as well, especially when I agree with them, and most of the stuff I have complained about or raved about has been in the reviews also.

[connermt]

Originally Posted by Black Pearl

The 07 CRV didn't do so well on Consumer Reports coming in 5th behind the v-6 Rav 4, the Santa Fe, 4cyl Rav 4, & Subaru Forester. Yet for reason it is doing # 1 in sales. I compared all of the top except the Santa Fe and found them unattractive in one fashion or another. But the biggest factor was that I heard the angels sing (somewhat of an exaggeration) when I sat in the CR-V and heard nothing when I sat in the others. The Subaru was nice technically but it just looks like an oversized station wagon. The Rav 4, I just plain didn’t like. It has a very plastic look about the tail especially the spare tire—which I didn’t like either. I am somewhat ashamed to say that I bought the CR-V because it felt right. I am mystified by Consumer Reports. The Rav 4 I believe got an 84 to the CR-V’s 72.

I like reviews as well, especially when I agree with them, and most of the stuff I have complained about or raved about has been in the reviews also.

Not that I am defending the CRV, but the last 2 times I listened to Consumer reports I got burned something fierce. Also, there isn't much data on 07 to compare to (at least) the Toyota, so I would question true apples-to-apples testing. (Actually, the last CR I got (couple months ago) didn't have the 07 listed at all.) The Hyundai (assuming it was the redesigned model) is relatively new as well, so not sure there is much to go on with it, either. Hyundais have good initial quality, however, after a year or so things can turn out to be quite different (speaking from a few personal experiences). Hyundais seem ot either be great or awful - not much in between. Regardless of the year, comparing a CRV to a Santa Fe doesn't seem quite correct to me. A more actual comparison would be Santa Fe to Pilot or CRV to Tuscon I would think.

[Black Pearl]

Originally Posted by connermt

Not that I am defending the CRV, but the last 2 times I listened to Consumer reports I got burned something fierce. Also, there isn't much data on 07 to compare to (at least) the Toyota, so I would question true apples-to-apples testing. (Actually, the last CR I got (couple months ago) didn't have the 07 listed at all.) The Hyundai (assuming it was the redesigned model) is relatively new as well, so not sure there is much to go on with it, either. Hyundais have good initial quality, however, after a year or so things can turn out to be quite different (speaking from a few personal experiences). Hyundais seem ot either be great or awful - not much in between. Regardless of the year, comparing a CRV to a Santa Fe doesn't seem quite correct to me. A more actual comparison would be Santa Fe to Pilot or CRV to Tuscon I would think.

Your right, my 99 Voyager Van was recommended, apparently for those who drive less than 105K. I subscribe to the on line version of CR and that is where I seen the reviews. Some of the reason for the high ratings on RAV was the V6 and third row of seats. The 3rd row of seats in my van was almost useless (smaller version not the Grand Voyager) so I am curious as to what exactly one would seat in the Rav's third row. Elves? I agree with your comments on the Santa Fe.

[connermt]

Originally Posted by Black Pearl

Your right, my 99 Voyager Van was recommended, apparently for those who drive less than 105K. I subscribe to the on line version of CR and that is where I seen the reviews. Some of the reason for the high ratings on RAV was the V6 and third row of seats. The 3rd row of seats in my van was almost useless (smaller version not the Grand Voyager) so I am curious as to what exactly one would seat in the Rav's third row. Elves? I agree with your comments on the Santa Fe.

I watched a show last night that had (among others) the CRV, Outlander & Raav. They said the Outlander & Rav's 3rd row seats were only meant for small kids. They also had the Vue Greenline, CX7, Tuscon, Escape hybrid & Jeep Compass. They ranked the CRV the best all round

[rrbhokies]

Originally Posted by connermt

I watched a show last night that had (among others) the CRV, Outlander & Raav. They said the Outlander & Rav's 3rd row seats were only meant for small kids. They also had the Vue Greenline, CX7, Tuscon, Escape hybrid & Jeep Compass. They ranked the CRV the best all round

I'm not sure I understand the benefit/purpose of the 3rd row seats in the smaller SUVs. Sure, you can squeeze an extra pint-sized child in there, but for goodness sakes, if you need the passenger space, just step up to a Pilot. That was Honda's reasoning for not bothering with a 3rd seat. The other makers are trying to make their vehicles try to be everything for everyone. My take on that is the jack of all trades, master of none mentality.

I drove the RAV-4 and sure it has a peppy V6 and the 3rd row seat, but it looked cheap and didn't handle nearly as nice as the CRV. The CRV does just fine with the 4 cylinder engine and I have no problems accelerating, or even passing on the highway. Just because one or two makers decide to overly pump up their vehicles with V6's and 3rd row seats doesn't mean that should become the defacto standard. Consumer Reports should know better. In real world testing, I would find it very difficult to see where someone would rate the RAV-4 higher than the CRV.

As for someone who said the CRV should be compared to the Tuscon and not the Sante-Fe, wrong. The Tuscon is a very small sport ute. The CRV is in the same size and weight category as the Santa Fe, so it is a fair comparison, and still, the CRV is being dinged for not having features it doesn't need to be the best SUV. And that's why, in the end, the CRV is outselling all of the other SUVs, both in their category, as well as in other categories.

If a vehicle doesn't need a V6 or a 3rd seat, then don't put it in. Honda has done the right thing, and let's see where the Santa Fe, or even the Rav4 stand at the 130K mile mark. I bet that the CRV will be riding strong and steady, unlike the competition.

[connermt]

Originally Posted by T Mac

By Michael Taylor, Chronicle Auto Editor

Click here to read the entire review from San Francisco Chronicle

I would have to agree with this as a general rule. I recently drove a G2 CRV & was surprised at how much more refined the G3 is. The G2 was more toy-truck like than the G3 (not that there's anythign wrong with it if you like that). Although, I will say the G2's tranny didn't want to shift all the time like the G3's does.