Honda CR-V Owners Club Forums banner

21 - 33 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
It's always interesting to see what williamsji says I said. Although it does seem to bear more of a resemblance to what williamsji wants to say is wrong, than to what I actually said.
JeffJo is critical of the fact that the final scores between hybrid RAV4 and CRV gave a minor nod (emphasis on "minor") to the RAV4.
No, what I was pointing out was not the subjective "road test" score, where the hybrid CR-V had an admittedly-minor 4 point lead over the hybrid RAV4. Or the tie in the subjective reliability assessment[1]. It is what is supposed to be a completely non-subjective (from CR's standpoint) modification of those scores into an "overall" score. The CR-V did as well, or better, in all of the non-CR assessments tests that go into that modification, yet the RAV4 somehow gained 4 points in it.

My claim is that more than what they list as their criteria go into some of their ratings. This was one example. Another was their 3-out-of-5 for the transmission.

JeffJo is correct that CR does not show members the actual scoring by testers... nor should they. What buyers need to know is the composite finding of the tests.... IF... IF you trust CR
I don't recall ever saying that; but sure. I agree. And I don't distrust any of their individual tests. What I'm saying is that they seem to be subtracting for the same things multiple times, and you apparently agree:

I can tell you exactly why the RAV4 outscored the CRV by a small amount in the comparison. ----> little persistent things for the gen5 CRV... like the Head Unit.. which CR hates with a passion for it's poor user friendliness that when coupled with their test results showing the 2.0 engine to be noisier than expected, brakes being more sensitive than in the ICE CRV, and the handling being less nimble on the CRV hybrid vs the ICE version.... I am honestly surprised that the final point scores for hybrid CRV are only two points lower than for the ICE version, regardless of any scoring comparisons to the RAV4.
Well, in most of this you are comparing the two CR-Vs. But everything you mention here is INCLUDED IN THE "ROAD TEST" SCORE, where the hybrid CR-V was ahead 80 to 76 over the RAV4. A sleight lead, certainly, but a lead nonetheless. If any of what you just said explains how they wound up tied in the overall score, then CR is counting them twice as negatives.

Which was my point. It is not that any of their subjective tests are not trustworthy, or honest. It is that they seem to be counting the faults multiple times.

+++++

[1] This is one of the areas where we don't see what goes into it. Although if it is based on 2019 data, the CR-V got 5-out-of-5 in 16 of 17 areas, and 4-out-of-5 in "ion-car Electronics." The RAV4 got 2 more important 4-out-of-5s, and a 3 in "in-car Electronics."
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
2,417 Posts
...

My claim is that more than what they list as their criteria go into some of their ratings....
Have you contacted CR with this claim, and requested an explanation?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29 Posts
Rated slightly lower overall compared to the ICE version, but still a recommended buy.
Overall Score = 75
Road Test score = 80.

Key reasons:
Engine noise and their road tests reported out consistently that they felt the acceleration from a stop was sluggish and noisy due to the engine.

The hybrid rides a bit stiffer and does not handle quite as nimbly as the ICE version.

The brakes feel more sensitive... but they did not quantify how... only by comparison subjectively to the ICE version.

And of course they hate the Head Unit.. but this has been true for years with Consumer Reports on Honda CRV head units.

CR actually likes the RAV4 Hybrid just a bit better, though they scored it identical to the hybrid CRV. CR recommends buyers check out the CRV and RAV4 and choose what suits them best.
Interesting, but I,, for one, would not buy a hybrid at this time with current low fuel prices and the complexity of hybrids. My 2017 CRV is continuing to run flawlessly while sustaining a good gas mileage (37.0 mpg) with 50,000 miles on the do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Car and Driver also evaluated the hybrid CR-V. Personally, I would choose a full gasser or hydrogen fuel cell over hybrid or electric, but I have my own reservations.

Tested: 2020 Honda CR-V Hybrid Can't Match the Toyota RAV4 Hybrid's Fuel Economy
We averaged a respectable 33 mpg with our CR-V hybrid in mixed driving. While our example's 32-mpg return on our 75-mph highway fuel-economy test is 4 mpg greater than the standard CR-V could manage, that figure is 3 mpg shy of the hybrid's EPA figure and 5 mpg less than what a 2019 RAV4 hybrid returned in the same test.

I have a 2019 CRV Hybrid and I average 48mpg mixed and 52 highway..
 

·
Registered
2017 CRV Touring - Pearl White w Black Interior
Joined
·
3,909 Posts
Discussion Starter #25
Interesting, but I,, for one, would not buy a hybrid at this time with current low fuel prices and the complexity of hybrids. My 2017 CRV is continuing to run flawlessly while sustaining a good gas mileage (37.0 mpg) with 50,000 miles on the do.
Yeah.. hybrids do not make sense for every driver.

On the other hand, ICE versions of motor vehicles being sold new in the US is heading for extinction in the consumer motor vehicle space. So, we all have to begin to mentally adapt for the future embrace of non-ICE powertrains.

EU appears to be ahead of the US in this regard, but even in the US.. the big brands like Honda have committed to be largely all EV, plug-in hybrids somewhere between 2025 and 2030. My bet is Honda is targeting 2025 for it's big selling models (Civic, Accord, FIT, CRV and probably HRV too).

Personally, I would not buy a hybrid CRV this late into the gen5 platform life cycle. I would wait for the gen6 (likely spring of 2022, but released as an early 2023 release) and see what Honda design and innovations look like.

The thing with hybrids is they are most beneficial for in town driving of reasonable length in time and distance. Not much benefit on the highway compared to the ICE versions. So.. planned use is an important consideration with stepping in to a hybrid.

My feeling continues to be that in the long run.. it is plug-in hybrids that will dominate the US market share for non-ICE variants. Reason: you get the great benefits of a plug-in for short hopping 7/24, and for longer trips the hybrid feature carries you where you need to go without any concerns about where to recharge your battery pack.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
Interesting, but I,, for one, would not buy a hybrid at this time with current low fuel prices and the complexity of hybrids.
But the hybrid CR-V is less, not more, complex than our 2017 CR-Vs. It is a popular myth that a hybrid adds the complexities of a BEV to those of an ICEV; but the fact is that the EV components replace far more complex ones. They just aren't what you are used to.

All that is "added," really, are the two electric motors (a very mature and reliable technology), some power electronics (also mature), and a clutch. They replace your entire transmission, the torque converter, the alternator, and the starter motor[1]. The serpentine belt is gone; the devices that would be driven by it are all electric.

My point is that complexity/reliability arguments support choosing an HEV over the pure ICEV. And you gain som efficiency as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: williamsji

·
Registered
2017 CRV Touring - Pearl White w Black Interior
Joined
·
3,909 Posts
Discussion Starter #28
Is the CR-V noise noted by CR while accelerating, or at hwy cruise?
I believe they reported the issue as only under heavy acceleration. Similar to what Car&Drivers review reported.

Nobody however has quantified the noise.. in db or any other form of standard measurement.

Note.. engine noise did not cause CR to refuse to put it's coveted "recommended buy" tag on it.
 

·
Registered
2017 CRV Touring - Pearl White w Black Interior
Joined
·
3,909 Posts
Discussion Starter #29
But the hybrid CR-V is less, not more, complex than our 2017 CR-Vs. It is a popular myth that a hybrid adds the complexities of a BEV to those of an ICEV; but the fact is that the EV components replace far more complex ones. They just aren't what you are used to.

All that is "added," really, are the two electric motors (a very mature and reliable technology), some power electronics (also mature), and a clutch. They replace your entire transmission, the torque converter, the alternator, and the starter motor[1]. The serpentine belt is gone; the devices that would be driven by it are all electric.

My point is that complexity/reliability arguments support choosing an HEV over the pure ICEV. And you gain som efficiency as well.
I agree.. objectively the power train is less complex and lower maintenance overall.

That of course assumes the electric drive motors are solid.. which I am sure they are as Honda put a lot of design effort in their driver motors for iMMD. They even managed to design both the drive generator and drive motors without rare earth magnets.. and that takes some doing.. but is a prudent move by Honda.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
They even managed to design both the drive generator and drive motors without rare earth magnets.. and that takes some doing.. but is a prudent move by Honda.
Without heavy rare earth elements for the magnets. They use neodymium, atomic number 60, which is a light rare earth element.
  • The name "rare earth" doesn't mean "uncommon." It means that the element doesn't form veins of ore. So a tremendous amount of dirt has to be processed to extract it.
  • Still, light rare earths (atomic numbers 57 to 61) are far more common than the others. Neodymium is mined in the US and Canada.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
Well.... 2021. Maybe they listened?
143231


The 2020 Hybrid went from an 72 overall. to just "recommended." A quick look at the details only show that its reliability estimate went from 3/5 to 5/5, That, and they "forgot" the 80/100 on the road test (and transferred it to the 2021).

But the 2021 jumped to 81 overall, with only a 4/5 reliability. Wonder where they got the 3/5 "owner satisfaction" so soon?

And the 2021 RAV4 hybrid, with no change that I saw, dropped from 75/100 overall to 72/100.

I'm guessing things didn't get updated correctly. I suspect widespread owner fraud, and demand a recount. ;)
 

·
Registered
2020 CR-V Hybrid EX
Joined
·
46 Posts
European will -no doubt- favour the RAV4 for it's towing capacity. 2x Honda's towing capacity. Still, I wouldn't trade my CR-V for the RAV4. Its current styling is not... well... not my taste.
I'm not sure why, but the European model is at least rated to tow something. The US model is rated to tow precisely zero pounds. :)
No matter to me, I have no need to tow anything.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
I'm not sure why, but the European model is at least rated to tow something. The US model is rated to tow precisely zero pounds. :)
It's because the requirements and expected driving conditions - most critically, the speeds - are different. Many European countries have 50 mph speed limits when towing; the US does not.

But it is a complicated subject. For a well thought-out explanation, see:

And, for a personal opinion that I haven't double checked here but I find applies in many areas, Honda is more conservative than Toyota. If Honda doesn't think a vehicle will be used consistently with a government spec, they won't advertise or recommend it as such. Even if it qualifies. Toyota will design their vehicles to just surpass it, and then advertise it.

Example:
  • For mileage comparisons, the EPA rates cars in various size categories. If passenger+cargo volume is between 100 and 110 cubic feet, it is a compact. Up to 120 cubic feet, it is mid-sized. Above 120 cubic feet, it is large.
  • The Prius has 91 cubic feet of passenger space and 27 cubic feet of cargo space. But it is a hatchback, which the EPA does not rate it separately from sedans.
    • At 118 ft^3, it fits the "mid-sized" category meant.
    • So Toyota calls it mid-sized.
  • The Accord has 106 cubic feet for passengers, and 17 for cargo. No, it can't fit as much in the trunk as a Prius can in its hatch. But the trunl is considered to be cavernous for a sedan.
    • At 123 ft^3, the EPA calls it a large car.
    • Honda calls it mid-sized.
    • Still, the Accord Hybrid is compared against a Prius, even though it has 16% more passenger space.
    • For reference, the Camry is 100 and 15 ft^3, "smaller" than either.
 
21 - 33 of 33 Posts
Top