Honda CR-V Owners Club Forums banner
  • Hey everyone! Enter your ride HERE to be a part of December's Ride of the Month Challenge!
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,185 Posts
Interesting article and full of facts. Like the fact that the CX5 may feel faster but the CR-V slays it on 0-60 being one second faster. Or the famous Mazda handling, the CR-V slays it again. Brakes...CR-V, interior space, CR-V. The list goes on and on.

"If you want to be coldly rational, the CR-V has more space, gets better fuel economy, has more-advanced technology, and is cheaper to own. It's also very good to drive. In the past, we lead-footed sports car lovers might have excused the Mazda's deficiencies in exchange for its lusty driving experience. But this time, we have no hesitation in recommending the CR-V to enthusiasts as well as our automotively apathetic friends and family. It's a narrow margin of victory, but whether your other car is a Camaro or a Corolla, if you want a compact crossover, you'll be slightly better served by the new Honda CR-V."

End of story, the CR-V is the winner. However, if you are one of those people who don't care about facts and figures, efficiencies, performance and all that other boring factual stuff and just follow your heart you may want the second best Mazda. Go for it, nothing wrong with second best. I'll keep my CR-V, thank you!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
884 Posts
I was cross shopping both but once I saw both in person it was a no brainer. Didn't even bother test driving the Mazda.
I did the same thing and then tried to convince myself the CX9 was the answer. The interiors are nice but that's where ended for me. I test drove a top of the line CX9 Touring. The Bose sound system had ridiculous distortion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,185 Posts
Thing is I see people bashing the CR-V on here at times. Yet I am a professional car guy and when I looked at the CR-V and what it offered for the price it won out over everything. Yes, its not perfect. Every car is a compromise due to cost concerns. But the little things some complain of are nothing compared to all the strengths of the car. I find very little to fault my new Touring over while finding much to love about it. I know Mazda's and gave them a real hard look over before buying my CR-V's over the years. Honda has done a fine job on this new model.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
92 Posts
Interesting article and full of facts. Like the fact that the CX5 may feel faster but the CR-V slays it on 0-60 being one second faster. Or the famous Mazda handling, the CR-V slays it again. Brakes...CR-V, interior space, CR-V. The list goes on and on.

"If you want to be coldly rational, the CR-V has more space, gets better fuel economy, has more-advanced technology, and is cheaper to own. It's also very good to drive. In the past, we lead-footed sports car lovers might have excused the Mazda's deficiencies in exchange for its lusty driving experience. But this time, we have no hesitation in recommending the CR-V to enthusiasts as well as our automotively apathetic friends and family. It's a narrow margin of victory, but whether your other car is a Camaro or a Corolla, if you want a compact crossover, you'll be slightly better served by the new Honda CR-V."

End of story, the CR-V is the winner. However, if you are one of those people who don't care about facts and figures, efficiencies, performance and all that other boring factual stuff and just follow your heart you may want the second best Mazda. Go for it, nothing wrong with second best. I'll keep my CR-V, thank you!

Hey Mr. Hans471+,

You write on automotive stuff yet you do not sound like a mechanic/ automotive inspector/ assessor/ a car critic/ specialist...but you sound like a...real writer. I enjoy your automotive knowledge/ experience and your interesting writing style. I guess you may be an "oldie generation guy" like I am. I learn a lot from you. Thanks a bunch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
92 Posts
Hey Mr. Hans471+,

You write on automotive stuff yet you do not sound like a mechanic/ automotive inspector/ assessor/ a car critic/ specialist...but you sound like a...real writer. I enjoy your automotive knowledge/ experience and your interesting writing style. I guess you may be an "oldie generation guy" like I am. I learn a lot from you. Thanks a bunch.
Hey Hans471+,

I meant you not only sounds like an experienced car critic but also a great writer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
243 Posts
For me the choice was obvious. The CX-5 is a better looking vehicle(both interior and exterior, but more so interior) but outside of that, the CRV trumps it in every other area that matters to people that buy these kinds of cars. More power, improved handling, better braking, better safety, better fuel efficiency, more cargo space, Apple CarPlay/Android Auto, better reliability(I still see plenty of late 90s Hondas on the road, how many late 90s Mazdas do you still see on the roads?), better resale value, etc...

One thing that Motor Trend neglected to mention(because they didn't have the data) is the CRVs advantage in safety rating over the CX-5. Had they of known this, I don't think it would have been as closed as it was considering how much people value safety.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,185 Posts
Hey Mr. Hans471+,

You write on automotive stuff yet you do not sound like a mechanic/ automotive inspector/ assessor/ a car critic/ specialist...but you sound like a...real writer. I enjoy your automotive knowledge/ experience and your interesting writing style. I guess you may be an "oldie generation guy" like I am. I learn a lot from you. Thanks a bunch.
Well, when I was young (in school) I worked at a auto shop weekends and evenings. Then in the Army in Europe for a few years my buddy and I bought Porsche cars, refurbished them and sold them to other GI's. After the military I came home, worked a couple of years in shops and then went back to school and became an automotive instructor. Kept going to school and worked my way up and along the way worked for Toyota, Chrysler and then GM in technical training/program development. When GM was getting in financial trouble some years back I left to go teach a college automotive program. There I got to work with many car makers. I also spent three years as a technical advisor for a Ford Lemon Law committee in Ohio where we reviewed cases and made decisions on how those cases would be resolved. I worked in the automotive industry for about 40 years. I think you have to be brain dead not to at least learn a little bit about cars in that length of time. :). It was a great career but its demanding as you are constantly having to learn new technologies and systems. But I loved it.

I never worked for Honda however. Early in my career Honda was still a new kid on the block. I was working at Toyota and we sort of made fun of Honda. But, I followed them, worked with many of their vehicles and worked with the local dealers in the city where I taught. I maintained a close relationship with all the various brands as my students went to work for those companies. I went to their training classes, spent time in their service departments and had friends working at most every dealer in the area. I still do classes for colleges in specially areas. I just did a class this past week on hybrid vehicle technology. Great bunch of students, some working on Bachelors, others MBA's. They had a great time and asked many good questions about the industry. Fun bunch of mature students.

I first got involved with Honda motorcycles. As I learned more about Mr. Honda and the company he built I started looking harder at Honda cars. Over the years I came to love them and we have had over 35 of them in our extended family, all with very good service records. We love them! I still respect Toyota's engineering but Honda won my heart for their great engines. Also due to the way the companies source parts Toyota's parts prices are, as a whole, higher. They are both good cars but Honda has become our favorites. Since our 1999 Accord just refuses to wear out after over 200,000 miles I can not complain!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
QUOTE=MangoConChile;1047362] still see plenty of late 90s Hondas on the road, how many late 90s Mazdas do you still see on the roads?), better resale value, etc...QUOTE

Actually, Honda quality started degrading in the 2000's and started becoming downright horrible in 2010. 2010 is when Honda's new ceo decided to lower costs and quality to increase margins. It's not the same Honda we all once knew. Add to that the shift in tech to direct injection, cvt, and turbo, you have a recipe for higher maintenance and shorter lifespan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,185 Posts
QUOTE=MangoConChile;1047362] still see plenty of late 90s Hondas on the road, how many late 90s Mazdas do you still see on the roads?), better resale value, etc...QUOTE

Actually, Honda quality started degrading in the 2000's and started becoming downright horrible in 2010. 2010 is when Honda's new ceo decided to lower costs and quality to increase margins. It's not the same Honda we all once knew. Add to that the shift in tech to direct injection, cvt, and turbo, you have a recipe for higher maintenance and shorter lifespan.
Direct injection is the way cars have gone. CVT's and smaller turbo charged engines are also on the list. The reason is quite simple....CAFE....Corporate Average Fuel Economy. The law is clear, get the ratings or pay a per-car fine. The car makers do what they have to do so they can sell cars. Right now these are the technologies that will work. Two or three years from now..who knows?

Honda might have taken a dip in quality in 2010,..I can't speak for that. I do know that our 2007 Fit was perfect for seven years and 118,000 miles until we got a 2015 Fit...which has also be perfect. My 2012 CR-V was the best car I have ever owned. None of that means the 2017 CR_V we bought will be the same but I am still trusting Honda. I think they may have made a boo-boo on that one Civic model that was panned a few years back but I give Honda credit for how they handled it. When it because clear they had dropped the ball on that model Honda apologized and the next year they made major improvements in that car to regain the public's trust. So, maybe they learned a lesson. I know Toyota made some major slip-ups and paid for their errors also. It happens.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
And I know that the 1981 GLC I bought new has now passed 500,000 miles in the hands of the 4th owner. They truly were Great Little Cars. I recently looked at the new CX5's. They only come with black interiors, Not again ever.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
And I know that the 1981 GLC I bought new has now passed 500,000 miles in the hands of the 4th owner. They truly were Great Little Cars. I recently looked at the new CX5's. They only come with black interiors, Not again ever.
Where did you hear that? A quick visit to Mazda's website will tell you that is not true.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top