Honda CR-V Owners Club Forums banner

2641 - 2660 of 2735 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
43 Posts
Correct me if I'm wrong. Honda came out with several variations of the "Fix" I wonder if the later versions came closer to solving the problem. There was never much info out on all the variations.
It's been made clear that regional temp ranges have played a roll in this issue so my guess is that different versions are used based on the climate of a region where issues are reported.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Ok, help me understand this and I do confess my ignorance on the tech stuff. All 2020 crvs are being built in Greensburg, Indiana (last I heard). Do they program the onboard computers differently depending upon where they are to be shipped?
Acadia
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Ok, help me understand this and I do confess my ignorance on the tech stuff. All 2020 crvs are being built in Greensburg, Indiana (last I heard). Do they program the onboard computers differently depending upon where they are to be shipped?
Acadia
no way..and i also don't believe there is several variations of a "fix" either. the engineers tweaked whatever they needed to and that's that. it's across the board whether it's going to miami or minneapolis.know way there variations, and it's dependent on where the final destination is..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,622 Posts
Exactly my point. It moves the car and growls because it's working hard.
I have literally never had my CRV above 4500 rpm (no where near it's redline, which I doubt you could cross anyway with all the safe-tune features in a stock 1.5T) ... and the one time ran it past 4000 rpm was one time as I recall.. when I had to accelerate to avoid a crazy traffic maneauvor by someone else on the freeway.

95% or the time, freeway or in town.. this engine runs between 1500 rpm and 2500 rpm. The engine literally never "breaks a sweat".. so please.. stop with the hyperbole here about the engine working hard. If anything this engine is simply too efficient in the CRV platform... hence it's tendency to run cold in cold weather.

Working? Sure. Working "hard?" No. :)

This engine actually works harder moving normally from a stop to about 25mph then at any other time. Turbo spools up quickly when you hit the gas from a stop and force the rpm past 1500, and then the engine and CVT quickly adjust as you ease back up once you reach speed.. and it settles in around 1500-1800 rpm. The first Honda engine in a CRV that actually works this way.. a little grunt from stop, then ease into sippy-cruisy mode.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
This engine actually works harder moving normally from a stop to about 25mph then at any other time. Turbo spools up quickly when you hit the gas from a stop and force the rpm past 1500, and then the engine and CVT quickly adjust as you ease back up once you reach speed.. and it settles in around 1500-1800 rpm. The first Honda engine in a CRV that actually works this way.. a little grunt from stop, then ease into sippy-cruisy mode.
If rpm still stays below 2000 rpm even under higher engine load, it has to use a richer fuel mixture to prepare for LSPI. Tuning like that is not good for OD.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,622 Posts
If rpm still stays below 2000 rpm even under higher engine load, it has to use a richer fuel mixture to prepare for LSPI. Tuning like that is not good for OD.
Except you have misunderstood or distorted what I stated. This engine operates more prevalently under a constant load state, rather then constantly changing load... largely because the engine and CVT have been designed as a matched pair for a change. As such.. the engine does not need to be constantly reving higher for slight changes in steady state driving.

Your statement relies on ignoring the tuning between engine and CVT, and assumes the same basic dynamics as prior engines used on the CRV.

The point really being... the engine has plenty of reserve power on demand, but when operating at a steady state driving... the power demand is actually low.. which is why even older CRV engines perform well during steady state driving. The real question is when there is a demand for more power for a particular change in driving state, how does the powertrain perform, and under what load conditions. 90% of the time... a demand for more actual power from this engine ocurrs from a stopped state at an intersection up to mid level speed. After that, unless you insist on performance based speed gains (like onramp into traffic or strong inclines, etc), the engine has no material need to boost rpm.. because the CVT is running in a steady state.

With this generation 1.5T engine and it's tightly coupled CVT, the power dynamics are much different then prior generation powertrains with CVTs. In older engine designs mated with a CVT.. the engine was actually forced to be over revved in order to provide the needed torque that a CVT requires. With the advent of the 1.5T, the engine provides much more torque at lower rpms, effectively providing near peak torque at just over 2000 rpm and until a demand change is placed on the engine (such as an uphill climb at steady state speed.. just to sight one exampe) the engine simply purrs along without any CVT juttering demands on rpm.

Bottom line.....CVTs are torque driven, not rpm driven. Granted there is always some connection between the two. But with the 1.5T which is in fact purpose designed (one of the first Honda engines so designed) for optimal pairing with a state of the art CVT, the assumptions so common with owners about an engine have indeed changed. No detuning of the engine for LSPI is required within the normal torque band of the engine as it is mated to this CVT. The only reason the engine needs to rev higher when forcing a change of state in driving is driven by the physics of the CVT during a change of state.

By the way, I doubt this particular engine would perform well at all with a normal gear shifting transmission. Same is true to a certain degree if you mate it to a manual transmission. The 1.5T was purpose built for CVTs.. though Honda has proven they can tune it differently in order to mate it to a manual transmission under specific circumstances (see specific configurations of Civic, which in fact use the same core powertrain components yet tune them differently, including boost, compression ratio, electronic tuning).

Of course you can put this powertrain into sport mode and up the performance and rpm curves accordingly, but this is really all vanity of the driver, because for normal driving conditions, there is no actual requirement for sport mode.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,622 Posts
You're an engineer. You have to know the power is coming from somewhere. You're a lot more qualified than I am to explain it in detail. I only know that mechanical power comes from mechanical parts, and those parts never last forever.
You own an LX with a 2.4, if I recall correctly.. which drives completely differently.

Power comes from the engine, of course. Power delivered to the wheels is via translation of torque (not horsepower) through the CVT. Make a poor powertrain matching between engine and transmission (as was true in older CRVs with the 2.4 and a CVT) and you end up with an engine always being high on the rpm revs, even at steady state driving. because the older 2.4s had to run above 4K rpm to get into the full torque band required for the CVT when a change in driving state was required.

In my view, you are ignoring the different efficiency components in this particular powertrain, which are quite different then prior CRV powertrains, and clearly more efficient.. given the notably better fuel economy under the same driving conditions ... because at the end of the day... it is fuel translated to torque to the wheels that matters. The gen5 1.5T powertrain is much more efficient in the translation and hence is able to operate in a more "relaxed" state while driving in most conditions.

As for your segway about "those parts never last forever".... I'd rather have a powertrain that is efficent and runs predominantly in a relaxed state during driving... vs an engine being forced by it's design and poor mating to a CVT that must be constantly running at higher rpm for longer periods of time... a condition that puts more wear on the mechanics of an internal combusiton engine compared to one that is able to perform the same job more efficiently and at lower rpms.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
How's everyone doing so far? Our lease on the 17 is almost up, and sad to say that the the dilution is still present.
This was taken before I went for an oil change at 15% life and couple hours after dropping sister off to the train station. I'm from NJ and the ambient temp at the time was around 40f. and I've been using premium synthetic oil for the last 2 changes, penzoil ultra plstinum.
Do we know anything about the 2020 yet? It might have been posted already but last time I was here this was under a hundred pages! And as much as we would.love to get the hybrid, it's just not in the budget rn. Tho I am still warry to be another first adopter. And from what I've seen, our case isn't as bad as others as I do my due diligence, and plus maybe we're just lucky. Our oil never went past about half an inch above the plastic part of the dipper(as seen in pic). I still haven't done oil testing, but would this be a good time? We were thinking of maybe keeping the 17 for another year, because honestly, aside from this the car is running great! Still heats up very quickly, but I've never had a proLem with that tbh even when the car was underneath a pile of snow from couple years ago. Then again it might not be a big problem here Jersey cause it doesn't get super cold often.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts
As for your segway about "those parts never last forever".... I'd rather have a powertrain that is efficent and runs predominantly in a relaxed state during driving... vs an engine being forced by it's design and poor mating to a CVT that must be constantly running at higher rpm for longer periods of time... a condition that puts more wear on the mechanics of an internal combusiton engine compared to one that is able to perform the same job more efficiently and at lower rpms.
Higher RPMs or not, I have complete confidence that the 2.4 engine in my LX, with full synthetic oil changes every 5500-6500 miles, will outlast the rest of the vehicle. Not forever, but longer than pretty much everything else around it. The older Japanese Big 3 engines from the 80s and 90s were great. The 2.5 that I had in my 2013 Rogue was great, despite it being "improperly" paired to the CVT and also being underpowered for the vehicle it was in. For all the complaints about the Rogue, and there are many, I never hear anyone complaining about engine problems. That 2.5 Nissan engine has a long history in older Altimas dating back many years before the Rogue was introduced, and it is an absolute beast. Not the best on fuel economy for sure, but as sure as the sun rising in the east and setting in the west.

The first, second, and third generation Camry engines were great, and until the poor design that started causing oil sludge in the 1997-01 fourth generation, they virtually never failed. Every Accord prior to the 1998-02 generation that had common transmission problems came with a practically indestructable powertrain, just like the early Camrys.

The 2.4 in my LX is a direct descendant of those extremely durable and reliable Japanese gasoline engines. The more common smaller turbo engines being built now I strongly suspect are designed with planned obscalence in mind. I drove a 2019 Ford Escape SE rental last night with under 17,000 miles. The entire dash and instrument cluster is a disaster, and it's harder for me to figure out American cars than German, but once I got moving, it drove beautifully with its 1.5T paired to a 6-speed automatic. Also had extremely good braking response, forcing me to reduce the amount of pressure I used pressing the pedal. That's just drive-by-wire.

Point is, I question whether Honda's modern 1.5T is really any better than Ford's. If someone told me 25 years ago that a Taurus has a better engine than an Accord, I'd laugh. Such a statement wouldn't have been worthy of any articulated response beyond a good chuckle. Now this is where we are at, in a very realistic sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
187 Posts
How's everyone doing so far? Our lease on the 17 is almost up, and sad to say that the the dilution is still present.

My WI based 18' Touring with the "fix" applied looks just like yours does but my oil is still at 85%. We drove it for 250 miles on Thanksgiving day and the oil level stayed put. It still smells like gas the only difference is it got even blacker.

And yes William I know what gas smell like. For kicks I pulled my dipstick on my 15' Jeep GC with about 5,000 miles since the oil change and it smells like oil not gas. Great vehicle otherwise although I find the drivers seat to not be anywhere near as comfortable as my Jeep on longer trips.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
406 Posts
Except you have misunderstood or distorted what I stated. ... Bottom line.....CVTs are torque driven, not rpm driven. Granted there is always some connection between the two. ... The only reason the engine needs to rev higher when forcing a change of state in driving is driven by the physics of the CVT during a change of state.
I generally bypass your posts because they are verbose and argumentative. To quote you, others “misunderstand”, “distort what you said”, “ignore facts”, etc, and that is on this page alone. You state that you are an engineer and I assume you mean well but I do not know where you learned your “engineering” - obviously not where I learned mine.

Take the long posts you made on this page to “wasp09” and “CrazyMind2017”. There are so many misconceptions I would not know where to start. For instance, you stated: “Bottom line...CVTs are torque driven, not rpm driven. Granted there is always some connection between the two. ... The only reason the engine needs to rev higher when forcing a change of state in driving is driven by the physics of the CVT during a change of state.”
Huh! Why obfuscate the facts!
In school I was taught that Power equals Torque multiplied by RPM. This is elementary but don’t take my word for it, “H = T x RPM/5252, where H is horsepower, T is torque in pound-feet and 5252 is a constant that makes the units jibe. So, to make more power an engine needs to generate more torque, operate at higher rpm, or both.”

The 1.5L CR-V engine approaches peak torque at about 2,000 RPM and has a flat torque curve essentially after that, see chart below. The engine generates more power when accelerating, fighting a head wind, climbing a steep hill, etc by increasing RPMs - nothing to do with “the physics of the CVT”, whatever that means to you, and everything to do with the equation H = T x RPM. It is that simple.

No doubt you will respond to me with another long post telling me what you said to “wasp09”, that I have misunderstood or distorted what you stated. So go ahead and have the last word but keep in mind that saying so does not make it so.

Have a good day. :)

136509
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
... are designed with planned obscalence in mind....
Interesting, wish I knew. The 1.5 and "its" turbo seem to be designed together for each other: unlike most engines which have the turbo added after the fact, but the 1.5 and Turbo seemed to be designed together for one purpose.

NOW, if only Honda can keep up its usually reliability. Can this new engine (combined with turbo) keep up reliability 8-10 years from now?
Acadia
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,622 Posts
Interesting, wish I knew. The 1.5 and "its" turbo seem to be designed together for each other: unlike most engines which have the turbo added after the fact, but the 1.5 and Turbo seemed to be designed together for one purpose.

NOW, if only Honda can keep up its usually reliability. Can this new engine (combined with turbo) keep up reliability 8-10 years from now?
Acadia
Some of the more salty posters on the topic here seem convinced that the spark plugs will outlive the engine itself. :p

The best way to look at this is in terms of the total powertrain... ie: engine + CVT. A well tuned and mated engine+CVT is a much bigger factor in the life expectancy of the power train. An engine poorly matched with a CVT is going to have pre-mature end of life in many cases.

Happily, Honda appears to have a very well tuned and matched pair with the 1.5T and their latest generation CVTs. In fact I would submit that the 1.5T is the first Honda engine properly designed and tuned specifically for CVTs as this engine provide a very different torque profile then prior Honda engines and it was clearly designed with CVTs in mind.

As for total life cycle of the power train... I expect most manufacturers design todays vehicles with an expected 10 year life between rebuilds (that would be 120-150K miles... for the average driver). Chassis are generally designed for 15 years of useful life. Of course many powertrains will live longer then this... but the reality is.. everything else in the modern motor vehicle will be long obsolete at the 10 year mark.... given how much of the vehicle is electronics now days. From a practical standpoint, the days of the powertrain dictating the life expectancy of a vehicle are long gone now. But there will always be some enthusiasts that can and will rebuild and upgrade literally every system in a vehicle and be driving it 20 years after manufacture.. but this is pretty much the exception rather then the rule in modern consumer driving.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,622 Posts
If your engine is mated to a manual transmission, then engine horsepower and time to horsepower dominate. As long as you are fluent in shifting gears, the old traditional engine horsepower curves apply.

If your engine is mated to a CVT, then engine torque and time to torque dominate. A clear example of this is our 1.5T engine.. which was clearly designed to provide maxium torque at around 2000 rpm and continue to hold that torque all the way through 5000 rpm under a wide range of load conditions. For flat road driving (which dominates most drivers road conditions) ... this engine therefore will cruise along at 1500-2500 rpm at all legal speeds including highway. The only reason the engine has to provide the same torque at higher rpm is because not all driving is on flat road conditions (static loading) .... so there are times when more horsepower is required to maintain the same torque as the CVT increases it's demand for power due to demanding road conditions (like driving at speed up a strong uphill grade, or when total cargo weight is approaching maxium spec). In other words.. the CVT is very torque dependent, yet it will continuously adjust to loading conditions and the result is demand more from the engine... which means higher rpms (basic physic applies here).

Older design Honda engines are suboptimal (must run at higher rpms for the same torque requirement on flat road conditions) for use with CVTs, largely because they were not designed from scratch with a CVT load in mind.

Not that any of this really matters as far as I can tell with respect to the thread topic, but since it is in the discussion mix, it deserves to be clarified accordingly. Though the fact that the 1.5T is most often running at between 1500 and 2000 rpm for most drivers... that could be a silent factor in some of the oil rise some owners see under some conditions. A cold engine running in cold weather with a very relaxed rpm... certainly will not heat and stay heated as well as an older engine that needs to be running at 2500-3500 rpm for the same result.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts
Not that any of this really matters as far as I can tell with respect to the thread topic, but since it is in the discussion mix, it deserves to be clarified accordingly. Though the fact that the 1.5T is most often running at between 1500 and 2000 rpm for most drivers... that could be a silent factor in some of the oil rise some owners see under some conditions. A cold engine running in cold weather with a very relaxed rpm... certainly will not heat and stay heated as well as an older engine that needs to be running at 2500-3500 rpm for the same result.
I find this connection between RPM and OD to be of extreme importance.

The best way to look at this is in terms of the total powertrain... ie: engine + CVT. A well tuned and mated engine+CVT is a much bigger factor in the life expectancy of the power train. An engine poorly matched with a CVT is going to have pre-mature end of life in many cases.
I'm not looking to pick a fight with you, because maybe my experience is simply different, but the life of the "total powertrain" is complete nonsense in my humble opinion. If a Nissan or Subaru has a faulty CVT, nobody goes and replaces a perfectly fine engine along with installing a new CVT just for the hell of it. When a Subaru boxer engine suffers massive oil consumption problems, nobody blames the transmission.

I understand what you're saying, that when one is designed for specific use with the other, the total performance and longevity can be increased, potentially. But the overall quality of design, build, and materials in each individual component is really more important than anything else. A good engine will last a long time. A good transmission will last a long time. When they are paired together, even if they weren't engineered with each other in mind, they should both last a long time.

Nissan's well documented CVT problems have nothing to do with the engines those transmissions have been paired with and everything to do with the fact that Jatco CVTs simply suck. A good Honda engine and a good Honda CVT should be fine together for the long haul, even if the engine was originally designed many years ago to be paired to a traditional 4-speed or 5-speed automatic transmission and even if the CVT was designed to be used with a turbo engine. Running the 2.4L engine at 2500-3500 rpms will obviously burn more fuel than running the 1.5T at 1800 rpms, but it's not like frequently running 3000 or even 4000 rpms at normal operating temperature is going to prevent the 2.4 from reaching 300,000 miles, assuming all proper maintenance is done as scheduled.

There's a reason all mid-level and above oil filters now have an anti-drainback valve. It's so engines can run at high rpms and never be dry, even on cold starts. Good lubrication is a hell of a lot more important for longevity in older classic Japanese engines than keeping rpms low. As your own posts evidence, keeping the rpms (and therefore the operating temperature) too low can cause its own set of problems, to wit, oil dilution. Your assertion that a good CVT will help protect the 1.5T engine in the CR-V doesn't hold water in my opinion. To the contrary, the exact opposite could be true. This pairing between engine and CVT was made too efficient for its own good, and you have stated exactly that on this forum in recent days. You posted this exactly one week ago on page 131 of this thread:

As is already well known.. it is simply the fact that the 1.5T is extremely thermal efficient.. maybe the the best ever from Honda (and maybe to Honda's detriment in the case of the CRV) ....
In the 2.4, just don't hit the accelerator hard until the engine has a chance to warm up and circulate oil properly. Once at temperature, you can drive like a maniac on a racetrack, and engine wear will remain minimal.

Aggression will result in poor fuel economy, premature brake wear, potential traffic citations, and dirty looks from other motorists, but not very much premature engine wear. Ask me how I know. When I was in my 20s, I drove primarily in a 1986 Camry with 300,000 miles and had to replace brake pads every 12,000 miles like clockwork. There were a bunch of small leaks throughout the engine and I had to add one quart exactly halfway through the oil change interval at 1700-1800 miles, but the engine held up with great distinction and never needed any work whatsoever - no head gasket replacement, no valve adjustments, nothing. It never burned oil, only leaked a little, as evidenced by the puddle that built up in my parking space over the years. I did have to hire a lawyer once. ;) I've calmed down a lot as I've gotten older too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,622 Posts
As your own posts evidence, keeping the rpms (and therefore the operating temperature) too low can cause its own set of problems, to wit, oil dilution. Your assertion that a good CVT will help protect the 1.5T engine in the CR-V doesn't hold water in my opinion. To the contrary, the exact opposite could be true. This pairing between engine and CVT was made too efficient for its own good, and you have stated exactly that on this forum in recent days. You posted this exactly one week ago on page 131 of this thread:
Only two comments to your long post, so I have clipped out the relevant part.

You are taking my comments out of context to a certain degree.

The same 1.5T engine, with small adjustments for specific tuning is used with purpose built CVTs in Accords with virtually no OD issues to date. Same for Civics, with much less incidence of OD then on CRVs. So the design is sound, but the nature of the large engine cavity presents the engine with a different thermal environment then on Accords and Civics. My wifes Accord for example, with the same engine.. comes up to temperature notably faster then my CRV.

My closing comment about lower rpms being a possible contributor to OD must be examined in the context of other factors.. because rpms alone is not an issue in and of itself. Logic dictates that in cold weather, with a cold engine... more rpms will help the engine come up to temperature faster... at the expense of fuel economy. Once up to temperature, it's a non-issue.

As for the quality of Honda engines in terms of design and materials... I personally have no confidence issues with Honda in this regard. Honda has a consistent history of over designing their engines for consumer use.. and this appears no different with the 1.5T. Other manufacturers design and reliability practices is irrelevant to this discussion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts
Other manufacturers design and reliability practices is irrelevant to this discussion.
What has happened historically with competitors' vehicles is still relevant to this discussion, if only for finding proper context.

As for temperature and RPMs and the Accord/Civic/CR-V configurations, if we assume the large engine cavity in the CR-V is what prevents the engine and radiator from reaching full operating temperature quickly, well that's still a problem for CR-V owners, even if the same problem doesn't happen with the same engine and same transmission in other Honda vehicles.

When comparing the pairing of the 1.5T to the Gen5 CR-V CVT to the pairing of the 2.4L to that same CVT, any assertion that the Accord and Civic don't suffer OD is irrelevant within the framework of comparing one CR-V engine to the other. I'm not concerned about what happens or doesn't happen under the hood of a Civic or Accord when the focus is what happens under the hood of your CR-V compared to what happens under the hood of my CR-V.

Comparatively, your argument that the Gen5 CR-V CVT is much better paired with the 1.5T than the 2.4L clearly opens the door to understanding Nissan's good engines and their bad CVTs. The Nissan CVT is absolute garbage. Nobody is debating that. And the engine to which that crappy CVT has been paired was not engineered originally with a CVT in mind. However, there are no known reports of a crappy Jatco/Nissan CVT causing premature engine wear in one of those excellent 2.5L Nissan engines. In that same vein, I wouldn't expect the Honda 2.4L engine to suffer any premature wear as a result of its CVT pairing in the Gen5 CR-V. And unlike the Nissan, the Honda actually has a good CVT.
 
2641 - 2660 of 2735 Posts
Top