Honda CR-V Owners Club Forums banner

1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Got the latest Consumer Reports yesterday, they tested the Hybrid. Because of the covid virus they were not able to do a complete test.

What they did not like about it: slow from dead start, AND NOISY.

Acadia
 

·
Everything in Moderation
2006 CR-V EX, 5MT
Joined
·
8,565 Posts
That other Topic (pertaining to the internal and external sound systems (ANC and AVAS ) was deleted because it degenerated into name calling. :mad:

CR-Vs have always been known for their road noise, is that what would turn you off?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
Slower and noisier than what?

It smoothly goes like shit off a shovel with virtually no cabin noise. Can’t comment on the noise generated by AVAS because I’ve never heard it. One of the best cars I’ve owned and it still impresses me after 1 year of ownership.

That’s description definitely does not describe the CRV Hybrid I own.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
LOL, I was just quoting Consumer Reports, I have no opinion one way or the other. Just thought folks would be interested, anyway, the article is out there if you want to read it. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
What did Consumer Reports compare the CRV Hybrid with? A Lexus? It being noticeably quieter and smoother than a RAV-4 Hybrid was one of the reasons we bought it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
194 Posts
Got the latest Consumer Reports yesterday, they tested the Hybrid. Because of the covid virus they were not able to do a complete test.

What they did not like about it: slow from dead start, AND NOISY.

Acadia
I didn't think it was slow when I test drove. I do agree with the engine noise on the highway or when going up a hill.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,001 Posts
Problem with pseudo journalists is that they are so hooked on the RAV4 being a Hybrid, any new rival in that tradespace automatically has to have some "hang up" so as not to impugn the incumbent.

This is why auto-reviews, at best, are laughable comedy with no value.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,525 Posts
...
This is why auto-reviews, at best, are laughable comedy with no value.
I disagree. You should view/read them knowing there may be some bias, which is usually easy to spot. I use the information as a tool. If a reviewer points out something they find annoying, I make sure to see if it bothers me during a test drive. As example, things like seat comfort are very personal and you should never take anyone else's word on it. Same goes for infotainment and audio quality.

The areas where the reviews are very helpful, are when they compare pricing, accessories/options, dimensions and performance. Those are facts and bias only comes to play when they say things like: "vehicle y is better than vehicle z, because it has more cargo capacity". I can make that decision on my own, if that's important to me.

That said, some reviewers are totally useless, like Scotty Kilmer and Jalopnik.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,001 Posts
If a reviewer points out something they find annoying, I make sure to see if it bothers me during a test drive. As example, things like seat comfort are very personal and you should never take anyone else's word on it. Same goes for infotainment and audio quality.
As you highlight here, these are all subjective and will vary for people - a reviewers gripe may not resonate at all with anyone else. Hence, the bias and nonsensical nature of them even pointing things out in the first place.

Sure, perfomance etc may be an example of where the reviewer and a test drive may find similarities - beyond that and say, fuel consumption, most of these journo's just bang out word salad for their own back-patting exercise and seldom actually provide any facts at all.

I mean, some of the UK reviews about the 1.5T are atrocious - had I followed their "advice", I'd be driving a chimera version of a VW Tiguan crossed with a broken down BMW X3!

No thanks!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,525 Posts
As you highlight here, these are all subjective and will vary for people - a reviewers gripe may not resonate at all with anyone else. Hence, the bias and nonsensical nature of them even pointing things out in the first place.

Sure, perfomance etc may be an example of where the reviewer and a test drive may find similarities - beyond that and say, fuel consumption, most of these journo's just bang out word salad for their own back-patting exercise and seldom actually provide any facts at all.

I mean, some of the UK reviews about the 1.5T are atrocious - had I followed their "advice", I'd be driving a chimera version of a VW Tiguan crossed with a broken down BMW X3!

No thanks!!
Well, apparently you still watch them, even though you think they're useless. As I stated, they are what they are. If anyone just goes off of the reviewer's recommendation and does not do their own personal research, that's on them. I do not know anyone who does that, though.

I find it amusing that you keep harping on the German brands, even though they are not what they used to be. Some Audi's have really upped their reliability game, as well as BMW. While, some of the brands once known for their quality have slipped quite a bit. Your personal bias is yours to go off of, as mine is for me. I may do more research on things that interest me than most, which is why my opinions on the German brands has improved. Anyone who looked into them 10, or more years ago will be stuck with that negative vibe. Cost of ownership is another issue, which makes them less desirable for some. That doesn't make them less reliable, just more costly to own.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
Reviews in the UK are so biased towards certain marques it’s laughable and I’m looking at some high end German and allegedly British manufacturers. They may have upped their game but in general they’re still miles away from Honda in the reliability and bang per buck stakes.

In general the only readers who hang onto every word of these reviews are owners of these marques. The rest of us take them with a pinch of salt and are suspicious of anything written about them.

It appears as though US reviewers are a little more impartial in their findings and can therefore be trusted to provide an accurate assessment of a car irrespective of its origin. If that’s the case I’d be quite happy to use them as a credible source of reference when comparing cars.

I should add that I am biased against aforementioned manufacturers as I’ve owned several models previously and one or two turned out be money pits and didn’t live up to their hype. You live and learn.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,001 Posts
Well, apparently you still watch them, even though you think they're useless.
For clarity, I do read car reviews, but seldom, if ever watch any.

I find it amusing that you keep harping on the German brands, even though they are not what they used to be. Some Audi's have really upped their reliability game, as well as BMW. While, some of the brands once known for their quality have slipped quite a bit
Again for clarity, I am absolutely not going against your view of German cars having improved.

My standpoint is solely from a plethora of UK and European automags that highlight year in, year out, how "amazing" French, Italian and especially German cars are. They top the charts for being poorest in reliabilty terms and the most expensive for repairs. I am sure that some German cars have improved, but as @Charlie1960 points out, they are way way behind Honda, Toyota, Lexus, for example.

These are the same automags that fawn over every new BMW/Audi/Merc/VW et al that leaps off the drawing board into production. They bang on about "German quality" and other pseudo-buzz words, but only ever refer to their reliability when they compile comparative charts which then ironically show these same cars as being the worst of the lot.

So going full circle to the OP and this thread, automag testers/journo's are nothing more than amusement. Their 30 mins of driving around and calling it a comprehensive test is never going to emulate the day in/day out usage for the people that buy cars. Thats why their musings remain comical, not factual.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,936 Posts
Problem with pseudo journalists is that they are so hooked on the RAV4 being a Hybrid, any new rival in that tradespace automatically has to have some "hang up" so as not to impugn the incumbent.

This is why auto-reviews, at best, are laughable comedy with no value.
I generally agree with you.. but in this case... it was Consumer Reports.. and they are very objective and data driven.

I do find it odd though that CR would say the CRV hybrid is slow off the mark. It literally has more horsepower available on demand between the electric drive motors and the Atkinson engine compared to the 15.T. That said.. the 1.5T can really pep off the start line if you really hammer the accelerator (and it will be very noisy at that moment as well).

I guess I'll have to look up the CR review on the CRV hybrid to see the details.... because not enough context has been provided by the original poster.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,936 Posts
OK.. I just read the review from CR.. performed in April.

Not as drastic as presented by the original poster.. but yeah.. they do not feel the pep from the Hybrid from a full stop that they would "prefer" to see.

Here is an excerpt of their key "likes" and "dislikes":
What We Like
Tons of room: It’s quite easy to get in and out of the front and rear of the CR-V. Even though a higher step-in is required, the doors offer generous-sized openings and narrow sills. Lots of foot room also helps. The driver sits up high, with a good view out. The cloth seats are mostly comfortable, with a variety of power adjustments including ones for cushion height and lumbar support.

Solid, smart, and stylish: In terms of style, this generation of the CR-V has aged well. Our EX-trim Hybrid has an impressive-looking interior, with soft-touch material on the dash and windowsills. The woodlike trim across the dash and door panels livens up the cabin. The door armrests are covered with a comfy cloth material and have decent padding. The climate-control knobs are large and grippy with nice detents. The doors close with a solid thunk.

What We Don't
Initial acceleration: The CR-V feels lethargic when accelerating from a stop, as if the SUV was on its own schedule. While this means the experience is smooth and quiet, it also means that a faster take-off requires a firm press of the gas pedal, which wakes up the engine.

A raucous engine: Hard acceleration—whether it’s accelerating from a stop or passing on a highway—elicits a loud and unpleasant roar from the engine. It stands out in stark contrast to the quietness when driving under electric power, which is especially noticeable because the interior does a good job masking most wind and road noise.

CR's Take
The CR-V Hybrid has a slightly different personality than the conventional version. It’s not as zippy when taking off, and when the gas engine kicks in, it’s not very melodious. Unlike many electrified vehicles, this SUV doesn’t feel very quick off the line, and when it's pushed, the engine gets loud and emits an annoying drone. In many ways it’s the anti-Ford Escape Hybrid: While adding batteries made the Escape better, electrification didn’t really improve the CR-V beyond boosting its fuel economy.
Sounds to me like CR is comparing relative to some of the more "sporty" electric/hybrid drive models from other brands.

Note they also complained about the gen5 infotainment system.. but since that was not updated for 2020.. I will ignore it and not quote it here. CR has a real "jones" for most brands infotainment systems.. and has complained about Honda's systems for years, while also admitting Honda is making progress (such as demonstrated in the gen10 Accords).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
Their 30 mins of driving around and calling it a comprehensive test is never going to emulate the day in/day out usage for the people that buy cars. Thats why their musings remain comical, not factual.
Thanks William, the review confirmed Dark Knights point. If only they'd spent an extra 10 minutes testing they may have discovered how to deselect eco mode.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts
OK.. I just read the review from CR.. performed in April.

Not as drastic as presented by the original poster.. but yeah.. they do not feel the pep from the Hybrid from a full stop that they would "prefer" to see.

Here is an excerpt of their key "likes" and "dislikes":


Sounds to me like CR is comparing relative to some of the more "sporty" electric/hybrid drive models from other brands.

Note they also complained about the gen5 infotainment system.. but since that was not updated for 2020.. I will ignore it and not quote it here. CR has a real "jones" for most brands infotainment systems.. and has complained about Honda's systems for years, while also admitting Honda is making progress (such as demonstrated in the gen10 Accords).
It's perplexing why they didn't at least update the 2020 CR-V with the Accord's infotainment system. Also, I really hope they will release an Elite trim in the near future, with a pano roof and ventilated seats, it would be a good seller for them and let them better compete with Toyota and what they can offer in the RAV4.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
194 Posts
It's perplexing why they didn't at least update the 2020 CR-V with the Accord's infotainment system. Also, I really hope they will release an Elite trim in the near future, with a pano roof and ventilated seats, it would be a good seller for them and let them better compete with Toyota and what they can offer in the RAV4.
Besides the noise, the old infotainment system and associated complaints (CarPlay crashes, slow response) were the other reason why I nixed the CR-V Hybrid and ordered a RAV4 Hybrid. I definitely noticed a lag while playing with the system during my test drive. I had a Pilot as a loaner earlier this year and loved the newer system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
The "series" hybrid aspect of Honda's I-MMD (vs Toyota's "parallel" hybrid system and almost everyone else who pays Toyota for their patents) does take some time to get used to, namely, the timing the engine starts and the way it responses due to the demand for power from the electric motor/battery don't usually correspond to the driver's pedal input, and this throws some people off. This is very different from non-hybrid cars that most people are used to.

Perhaps it's the way I drive, the environment my car is subject to, or I am less sensitive to the noise from the engine, I am not that bothered by its uniqueness. To my ears, Honda's engine sounds more pleasant when it does start. Additionally, since most of the time the engine is not directly connected to the drivetrain, I really enjoy the smoothness of the system and how EV like it feels (despite the engine sound). I remember feeling the vibration from the pedal when the engine kicked in in Toyota's system when we test drove.

I guess this really depends on each person's preference and I'd say both are very good systems, just different characters.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,936 Posts
It's perplexing why they didn't at least update the 2020 CR-V with the Accord's infotainment system. Also, I really hope they will release an Elite trim in the near future, with a pano roof and ventilated seats, it would be a good seller for them and let them better compete with Toyota and what they can offer in the RAV4.
It would be nice if they did... but that would have required a lot of other changes... beginning with an all new dash, wiring harnessing, other dash parts.. etc. The physical profile is quite different between the two, and the gen5 CRV does not have a number of features that the Accord does so the electronics is also a mismatch of sorts.

Given it was a mid life refresh.. and will be replaced by a gen6 most likely in 2022... if I were Honda.. I would not have updated the head unit either.

Personally.. no pano roof for me. Ventilated seats.. meh.... I use sheepskin seat covers in the front seats, so it again would be a waste. My objection to pano roofs is they offer little real value to me as a driver yet they represent a much higher risk of implosion due to thermal stresses. I honestly do not even use my existing moonroof on my Touring much at all. But I understand some folks think they are the cat's meow.

As for competing with the RAV4.. Honda already does very well in this regard. If you were to subtract out fleet sales Toyota does with the RAV... the CRV consumer sales volumes would be higher than the RAV... so I don't see compelling reasons to put additional expensive additions that many owners do not require or will not appreciate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts
There are other features that the CR-V is lacks that are found on the RAV4, such as heated rear seats. Personally, the ventilated are great addition in my view from having used them in one of our cars. In any regards, Honda could easily offer some of these features such as the pano roof already available in Canada, packaged as a higher CR-V trim.
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Top