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 114 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hello all, Just curious on how people would rate their CR-V to other cars they have personally owned. Lets say a score from 0 as a POS and 10 being GODLY and nothing else can come close to it.

My 2018 CR-V ex that I got for $28.5k OTD is a 7/10. It looks okay and drives fine. It does plenty for the price point. My only gripe I have over the 11k miles I have driven her is the rear seat belt and the weak no pep engine. I understand that it's not meant to be a fast car or a truck, but dang it's slow. I'm comparing it to my Boosted 370z nismo (Which I give a 8.5/10). I know it's a big difference in price, class, ect.

What do you all rate your CR-V vs your other car as?

Thangbom
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,902 Posts
I understand that it's not meant to be a fast car or a truck, but dang it's slow. I'm comparing it to my Boosted 370z nismo (Which I give a 8.5/10). I know it's a big difference in price, class, ect.
You're comparing a 4 cylinder turbo charged SUV that puts out about 190 hp to a sports car with a 6 cylinder engine that puts out 350 hp?
A closer comparison would be a Civic Type R. Even though it's only a 4 cylinder, at least it puts out 306 hp.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I'm comparing the car as a whole not just the power. For the price, The CR-V is really good hence my 7/10 rating. As for the 350hp Z, my Z was 505 WHP. This is why I'm curious as to what people think of their CR-V to their other car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,052 Posts
Compared to my last vehicle a 2014 RAV4 the 2018 CRV I have is a dream. Absolutely a step up in every way possible.

Rob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
164 Posts
Our new 2018 CR-V replaced a 2015 BMW X1 AWD. The reason for the trade was the X1 was smaller with much less room inside, especially for rear seat passengers. We found ourselves renting a larger car whenever we wanted to take a trip which included rear seat passengers. The X1 stickered at $38K and did not come with nearly the level of options and features which were standard on the CR-V Touring. The X1 did have a much more powerful engine and an 8-speed transmission which I liked a lot better though. It's handling and performance would have me grinning from ear to ear at times during spirited driving sessions. Just to give you a better idea I should mention it's top speed was rated at nearly 150 MPH. My wife isn't interested in high performance and much prefers the larger more option laden and comfortable CR-V over the old X1 and I agree the CR-V is nearly perfect for long trips. I would give the CR-V a 7 but I'm pretty sure my wife would give it a 9 or 9.5 out of 10.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,154 Posts
COmpared to my other car no comparison. if asked each car is a dream in its own.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Well I had a Mazda Demio and a Nissan Note so the comparison is unfair I guess, I would give my CRV 8/10. It has almost everything I was looking for in a car, I would give a perfect score if it comes with a more powerful engine perhaps 2.0 turbo? it will be a dream!! I do not feel it slow though


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
751 Posts
My comparison would be to the vehicle our 2017 CR-V replaced, a 2004 CR-V AWD EX. I'd give the new CR-V a 9/10.

Compared to the Gen2, the Gen 5 improved on the following:
1) More power. The Gen 5 is more than a second faster 0-60.
2) Braking is better.
3) Cornering is better.
4) Ride is so much better (then again our 2004 had 210,000 miles on it).
5) CVT is smooth, our 2004 was a 5-spd manual, we like a m/t car but it was time to move on.
6) Infotainment system is really good, considering the 2004 really had no infotainment system.
7) The multi-speaker stereo with sub is better.
8) Smart entry is way better than just a remote key fob.
9) LED headlights are better.
10) Seating comfort is better.
11) Interior space is better.
12) Fuel mileage is better.
13) Exterior paint is better.
14) Fit and finish is about the same. Our 2004 was built in the UK, which had some minor issues, the 2017 was built in Ontario and is very good, I would just like to see some tighter panel gaps.
15) AWD system is much better, the system is nearly full time compared to the 2004 which only kicked in after significant wheel slip.

Sure I could compare our 2017 CR-V to other brands of compact SUVs on the market, but compared to other vehicles I've personally owned, we have zero complaints. Sure, we'd like even more power, but after a disappointing test drive in the CX-5, having more power (at least in the Mazda) is nothing to write home about.

Back in 2004 we paid about $25k for our CR-V EX AWD. Back then it really was a utility vehicle with the EX AWD being the top trim level. In 2017, we paid $33k for our 5th Gen Touring AWD, a much more premium vehicle. If you consider adjusted inflation, $25k back in 2004 is about $32k in 2017. So we got a much nicer vehicle, with many more features for about the same cost as our previous CR-V!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
My wife traded her 14 Ford Escape SE for her new 18 CR-V EX. So this is a apples to apples comparison.

Transmissions: Ford had a 6 speed with Sport mode and the ability to manually down shift, engine braking on demand, CR-V CVT pretty much sucks in my opinion.

Interior: the CR-V has better back seat space, rear hatch area about the same. The Ford had more comfortable front seats but not as much small item storage space. The location of the steering wheel Tilt/Telescope lever was easier to reach in the Ford.

The Engines: Ford 2.0 L turbo, almost to powerful, Ford did a very poor job of managing torque steer however when carrying four adults in the car and merging onto an expressway, no worries about getting up to speed. The Ford engine was also DI, with no fuel in oil issues. Honda 1.5 L, DI potential fuel in oil issues. We only have 300 miles on the car so I haven't done any WOT driving. Just based on gentle driving, impressive gas mileage, but I don't think merging onto an expressway with four adults will be quite as confidence inspiring.

Highway driving, CRV is offers a quieter ride and it feels more stable than the Ford.

Honda Sensing Suite: Very impressive, I really like the ACC, wait for it, BUT in my opinion Honda Sensing can lead to "dumbing down the driver". Since the system is not fully autonomous, giving a poor driver the means to pay even less attention to driving is not going to end well. Some of the safety features found on the CR-V like the BSM were covered by wide angle mirrors in the Ford, guess which system will be trouble free in 5 years. The Ford also had the backup warning system, that not only warned of cars approaching behind you but also fixed objects and people, score another point for the old Ford.

Final scoring, Ford Escape SE 2.0L T 8 out of 10, Honda CR-V EX 1.5L T, 7 out of 10, yes, I wish we had kept the Ford.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
164 Posts
The BMW X1 is a smaller lighter car than the CR-V and comes with a 250HP Twin-Scroll turbo 8-speed sportshift transmission and the dealer service departments are installing 300HP tunes that do not affect the factory warranty. X1 makes it pretty easy to gain positions when you want and you don't need much room to do it either but with that said the CR-V is much more civilized and comfortable if you are primarily interested in getting from point A to point B economically with the capability to fit in and carry a lot of stuff around. My major disappointment is the constantly variable transmission which keeps engine operating speed lower and never allows the engine to stretch it legs. The CR-V would be a better car with a multi-speed automatic but Honda seems committed to the CVT for whatever reason. Incidentally, the CVT is a contributing factor to the LSPI/ oil dilution issue because of the suppressed engine RPM but Honda would never admit it because they have far too much invested in going down that road. The CVT is one of the contributors but not the main cause by itself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
751 Posts
The BMW X1 is a smaller lighter car than the CR-V.

Incidentally, the CVT is a contributing factor to the LSPI/ oil dilution issue because of the suppressed engine RPM but Honda would never admit it because they have far too much invested in going down that road. The CVT is one of the contributors but not the main cause by itself.
The X1 Smaller yes, but the X1 is about 200 lbs heavier based C&D's curb weight specs. I do like the extra power the X1 makes, it feels much more powerful than the CX-5 I test drove.

Incidentally, what data do you have that supports your believe that a CVT is a secondary cause of oil dilution? Or is it your expert opinion?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
164 Posts
The X1 Smaller yes, but the X1 is about 200 lbs heavier based C&D's curb weight specs. I do like the extra power the X1 makes, it feels much more powerful than the CX-5 I test drove.

Incidentally, what data do you have that supports your believe that a CVT is a secondary cause of oil dilution? Or is it your expert opinion?
I can easily locate the data you are asking for by searching the Internet again to find it again but you can do that too. I have a lot of experience in this area because I am directly involved in engine design, engine performance and testing and work for a company which produces about 1000 engines per year and every one is tested to a very high degree of precision with specially built engine dynamometer test equipment in specially instrumented test cells. This does not necessarily make me an expert in this area but 30 years of direct practical experience would suggest I can understand what the engineers are saying and trying to accomplish here in getting this problem solved. The reason engine operating speed is a contributing factor is suggested by the very name of the underlying cause, namely low speed pre-ignition or LSPI. LSPI is auto ignition occurring before spark ignition which causes a very rapid rise in uncontrollable pressure spikes much too early before the time the normal combustion process should be just beginning. Faster engine operating speeds reduce the available time for pressure spikes to initiate because the piston is accelerating away from the combustion chamber faster rather than lagging in it's vicinity for too long. Another way to think how this is possible is to remember back when you drove a stick shift car at low speed in high gear and tried to accelerate without downshifting. You will hear that marbles rattling loudly in a tin can sound telling you to downshift. Downshifting puts the engine in a higher operating speed range above that which encourages pre-ignition so the rattling marbles sound goes away because combustion is smooth and normal again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
655 Posts
The X1 Smaller yes, but the X1 is about 200 lbs heavier based C&D's curb weight specs. I do like the extra power the X1 makes, it feels much more powerful than the CX-5 I test drove.

Incidentally, what data do you have that supports your believe that a CVT is a secondary cause of oil dilution? Or is it your expert opinion?
I can easily locate the data you are asking for by searching the Internet again to find it again but you can do that too. I have a lot of experience in this area because I am directly involved in engine design, engine performance and testing and work for a company which produces about 1000 engines per year and every one is tested to a very high degree of precision with specially built engine dynamometer test equipment in specially instrumented test cells. This does not necessarily make me an expert in this area but 30 years of direct practical experience would suggest I can understand what the engineers are saying and trying to accomplish here in getting this problem solved. The reason engine operating speed is a contributing factor is suggested by the very name of the underlying cause, namely low speed pre-ignition or LSPI. LSPI is auto ignition occurring before spark ignition which causes a very rapid rise in uncontrollable pressure spikes much too early before the time the normal combustion process should be just beginning. Faster engine operating speeds reduce the available time for pressure spikes to initiate because the piston is accelerating away from the combustion chamber faster rather than lagging in it's vicinity for too long. Another way to think how this is possible is to remember back when you drove a stick shift car at low speed in high gear and tried to accelerate without downshifting. You will hear that marbles rattling loudly in a tin can sound telling you to downshift. Downshifting puts the engine in a higher operating speed range above that which encourages pre-ignition so the rattling marbles sound goes away because combustion is smooth and normal again.
Yeh, but...None of that is because of the CVT. If it used an 8 speed traditional automatic, they still would have programmed it to shift up early to keep revs low.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
164 Posts
Yeh, but...None of that is because of the CVT. If it used an 8 speed traditional automatic, they still would have programmed it to shift up early to keep revs low.
You can wind an 8-speed up through all the gears. With CVT the engine pulls continuously at one lower speed like a boat in the water when you pull the handle back.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
252 Posts
My other vehicle is a 2007 Saturn Vue.

The Vue and the CR-V are almost the same as far as size, shape, and functionality goes. There are some things I like better about the Saturn, and some things I like better about the Honda.

I give them both an 8.

Even though the CR-V is nicer in a lot of ways, I actually prefer driving the Vue more due to the smooth and powerful Honda 3.5L that's under the hood. That's a very nice engine, especially compared to what Honda put in our CR-V.

That, and the "infotainment" system in the CR-V tends to frustrate me a lot of the time. Maybe I'm old school, but I'd take back the manual knobs and buttons over the touch screen if given the choice.

Things I like better about my CR-V are the much improved AWD system, the adapive cruise control, and I guess the fact that it's not a General Motors car, lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
655 Posts
Yeh, but...None of that is because of the CVT. If it used an 8 speed traditional automatic, they still would have programmed it to shift up early to keep revs low.
You can wind an 8-speed up through all the gears. With CVT the engine pulls continuously at one lower speed like a boat in the water when you pull the handle back.
.

Again, It’s not the CVT’s fault. Either a cvt or a traditional automatic, will run to whatever ratio the computer tells them to adjust to. You’re confusing the transmission programming choice, with the physical transmission type.
My Cvt puts the rpms up close to 6k when I mat it. Same as an automatic would downshift to.
 
1 - 20 of 114 Posts
Top