CR-V vs Escape

vg33e power

The CR-V currently is on its 3rd generation (1997-2001)(2002-2006)(2007-currently) and the Escape is on its 2nd generation (2001-2007)(2008-currently) the fact that the CR-V is on its 3rd generation has nothing to do with how Honda's design may have flaws. Honda has always used a 4-year lifespan for each of its models up until the new millenium in which it changed to a 5-year lifespan. Honda adopted the 5-year plan to minimize costs of retooling but still maintain interests in new model redesigns without going stale for too long.

Ford up until now has not really establish a concrete lifespan for its line-up and for the most part takes too long to redesign its vehicles...probably one of the main reasons why their "car" sector starts out great and slumps badly towards the end of the life cycle (whatever it may be) of the particular model and end up in rental fleets rather then consumer's driveways (Last gen Focus, Crown Vic, Taurus/500, even Rangers). Just recently Ford has gotten the hang of lifespan remodeling in an adequate timeframe in the Focus, Fusion, and F-series. Lets hope that they adapt this in all their line up.

...and for clarification a 2004 Escape is a completely different vehicle then a 2009 in every aspect except dimensions. Is it a better vehicle? one would expect it to be, but "better vehicle" is subjective and lies on the eye of the beholder. I personally "like" our 2004 Escape Limited 4WD but I wouldn't say I "love" it. Ultimately it is my wife's vehicle and she loves it and if she is happy with it then thats all it matters no matter what I think...thats why I drive a Mazda5

explorerx4

seeing that we have 04 and 09 escapes, both limited models, i can assure you the the body/chassis is pretty much unchanged.
i will say they don't share much in many areas.
the doors/steering/quietness/fuel mileage are very different.
and btw, i still think the escape has always had better bones than any version of the cr-v.

chuckfromli

Better bones?
Do you mean the chassis/underpinnings?

I wonder if you know if the Escape cabin is roomier than a CRV or RAV4?

Thanks in advance!

vg33e power

By "bones" I take it you are referring to chassis. I have owned both and I agree that the Escape feels more substantial and much heavier..think solid. Perhaps the "heavier" feel hinders its handling because my wife's 2004 Limited feels lethargic when it comes to handling...not very nimble at least in comparison with the CR-V. The CR-V also is not very keen on the handling avenue but a bit better then the Escape. The CR-V does take the ege on fit and finish and quality of materials and build over the Escape if you ask me. So the Escape may have the "bones" you refer to but when it comes to fit. finish and quality of materials the CR-V takes the win.

BTW, if you want to compare apples to apples. I would take my wife's 2004 Escape Limited 4X4 over the 2005 and newer Escapes just for the sole reason that 2004 and older Escapes had a dedicated 4X4 switch in which you can turn on the 4WD system as in a conventional shift on the fly type and when off it acted just like what Ford now calls "Intelligent 4WD" which essentally turns on when it senses slippage....hmmm guess what? that type of system was already in place since 2001 in all 4WD Escapes it just never had a name plus CR-V has only had that type of system as well. So in reality 2005 and newer Escape became more gussied up and more like CR-V's...no thanks I will keep our 2004 in which I can let the computer turn on my 4WD if need be or I have the option to turn it on constantly. So does the Escape have more bones then CR-V? maybe but not much at least not your 2009. Your 2004 and my wife's 2004 are more "offroad " capable then 2005 and newer Escapes.

explorerx4

what i mean is the basic design still works, it has always been practical.
as a wagon, i like the top hinged rear hatch, glass you can open seperatly.
as i am over 6 ft, i can fit in the back seat, and like the recline feature.
the controls are pretty straight forward, so easy to get used to, even if you only drive it occasionally.
we replaced the original tires on the '04 with some goodyear tripletreads and they track really well, and never get tripped up in bad weather.
i do agree with some of what you say and some things are a matter of preference.
otoh, i think you have the 4wd systems all wrong.
one thing i like about the AWD vs the part time 4WD, is that there is less chance for someone to damage it. we had a service dept mess up our's to get some extra work(my opinion). it was repaired under warranty, but it should not have happened in the first place. the cr-v may have a similar system now, but it didn't start out that way.

blueiedgod

you know what i think is funny, the cr-v has been redesigned how many times?
we bought an 09 escape and still have our 04.
a lot of it has not changed.
basically, it is just a better vehicle.

Let's see....

CR-V 4 cylinder vs Escape 4 cylinder

CR-V wins in acceleration.
CR-V wins in fuel economy
CR-V wins in interior volume
CR-V wins in the sales volume

CR-V 4 cylinder vs. Escape 6 cylinder

CR-V wins in acceleration.
CR-V wins in fuel economy
CR-V wins in interior volume
CR-V wins in the sales volume

Yup, in the upside down world Escape is the winner, but fortunately, we live in the right side up world, and here, CR-V is the winner. :P

chuckfromli

There is no way a CRV beats a new 6 cyl. Escape in acceleration. Consumer Reports shows CRV at over 10 seconds to 60 mph. The V6 Escape at around 8 seconds. I've seen similar numbers elsewhere also.

chuckfromli

I believe, at least for this year, the Escape is outselling the CRV, but both are in the top 10 vehicles sold.

I would really like to hear more from blueied. He apparently owns one or two Escapes and a CRV and is looking for a new CRV.

1. Is this correct blueied?
2. Have you looked at the RAV4?
3. Is the CRV that much better than the Escape?
4. How has he reliability been on your Escape(s)?

I will be test driving all three in about a month, and would like your input, especially in regards to seat comfort, trip comfort, cabin room, reliability, etc.

Thanks in advance!

explorerx4

we look for the most part, at what we feel are the useful features, like the top hinged rear gate, which cr-v also has now, and the glass that can be opened seperately.
that way you can more easily stack stuff in the back or take things out with oout opening the whole thing. handy for removing groceries, instead of having them fall out when tha back is opened.
our new escape v6 which has 240 hp, is so far over the first 5k miles, averaging 3.5 mpg more than our '04 v6 has over it's 75k+ miles.
plenty of people like cr-v's, they must just be looking for some other attributes.

berri

Honestly, I own a previous gen CRV and have not been that impressed with it. I've rented Escapes and have not been that impressed with them either. The RAV4 is obsolete IMO due to its dumb rear door and cramped seating. I think it may be smarter to lay out another couple grand and get a Venza, Highlander or Edge. While the compact SUV concept may sound good on paper, I don't think it carries it off all that well in reality, and the mileage isn't all that different. The CRV never gets anywhere near its advertised highway mileage even though its well maintanied and gets driven around 70-75 mph. I get 22 on the Interstate and I expect the Highlander and Venza will do as well. You might as well bump up in models and get a nicer ride.

explorerx4

we looked at the MKX, Edge Limited plus Escape Limited.
it was hard to justify the extra 5-10k over the Escape.
I actually fit better in the second row of the Escape than either of the others, plus the 2nd row seats are low in the MKX and Edge.
over the course of a week, i averaged about 20 mpg in an Edge.
my wife is getting close to 23 with her v6 Escape.
one feature my wife would have liked is the power rear lift gate.
drive 'em all and buy what you like.

stevedebi

" The CRV never gets anywhere near its advertised highway mileage even though its well maintanied and gets driven around 70-75 mph. I get 22 on the Interstate and I expect the Highlander and Venza will do as well. "

Your CR-V gets 22. My 2003 got about 27 MPG @ 75 MPH. I sold it for a hybrid Escape after three years of ownership. My best tank was 34 MPG, but that was at high altitudes.

The Gen 3 CR-V has an extra gear and should do even better. BTW, my in-town was around 23 if I was careful with my gas pedal.

chuckfromli

........and no problems with the escapes?

BTW-That MKX is a beauty!

chuckfromli

I like the Venza, but I wanted a loaded car and I am not going to spend $33K for it. I need a very small loan. One child in college and one a year away from college. I would go preowned before I borrowed more than I feel comfortable with. Honda has the best CPO program and covers the whole car bumper to bumper for 12 mos. 12,000 miles. An '06 CPO Pilot EXL is around 22-23K by me.
The 4Runner, which I really like, is much harder to find with leather and an '06 LTD goes for around 25K. But I really want minimum out of pocket expenses for the next few years, so I am leaning towards something new.
If I don't like the Escape, the CRV or the RAV4, I guess I can go the preowned route.
I have some friends coming over tonight and they just leased a new RAV4 a few months ago. Hopefully they'll bring it and I can have a look. I know they took it on a thousand mile trip and the husband didn't sound too thrilled with it. The downsized from a leased Sienna and he mentioned the bumpier ride, smaller interior and less power (4 cylinder).

explorerx4

i guess we have a lot in common with our kids, i have the same situation.
if you need the room, a larger vehicle is a better choice.
if you are buying used, research the maintenance costs for tires/brakes/etc, which are going to have to be done sooner than with a new vehicle.
i am assuming you want your new one to last until #2 finishes college.
a lot of that depends on how many miles a year you drive.

chuckfromli

I don't really need the room. This new car will be local runabout. I like the option of having a new car to take on trips if there are just 2-3 of us going too.

My wife's '04 Sienna will still be the family truckster (isn't that the phrase from National Lampoons Vacation? LOL). It is fairly low mileage and reliable.

It would be great if I was able to pass the new one along to the younger son in 5 years. Great for him especially, since he won't have to be driving a minivan, LOL.

I don't drive much anymore. Retired young, so it's all local stuff and occasional trips to colleges. If I get another job it will be local, I'm sure.

A woman I worked with years ago posted on Facebook that she was dreading the idea of a minivan lurking in her future. She's about 15 yrs. younger than me. I told her that I had owned five of them, and that if you like road trips you can't beat them. I also told her that I just realized that when we replace my wifes car in a few years, we won't need a minivan anymore. And that's even sadder than having one lurking in your future.

explorerx4

you may want to look into a 4cyl sedan.
they get better mileage than even small suv/cuv's.
otoh, sedans sit lower and are harder to get in/out of.
we have never owned a minivan. we put a cargo box on top if we need the extra storage space.
btw, unless your kid gets to drive a bmw or ferrari, they won't be happy.

chuckfromli

No, I don't think I want a car, though I do like the Lincoln MKZ. I am to used to sitting up high, and I like that. Plus the getting in and out thing.

Just drove my friends RAV4 tonight. Just a short trip of a mile or two. I didn't push it all, but I was not impressed. First, I hit my head getting in. Second, even without a sunroof I was too close to the ceiling. And third, it just didn't feel substantial. There was nothing "wrong" with it. It steered nicely, if a little light and numb. It rode really quietly. But I am just used to having some steel around me. I guess I am just more of a truck guy.

PS-Yes, my older son is sure that he is going to have a McLaren one day. "Even if I have to buy it used". I haven't heard him mention that car lately. Maybe he's growing up.

If I don't like the CRV or Escape I will look for a used 4Runner LTD. I saw someone run a red light today that had been red for at least two seconds. Must have been going at least 40 mph too. About another second and a half and he would have hit the other traffic. GIVE ME STEEL!

explorerx4

my guess is that if you think the RAV4 feels too light, the escape will be similar.
the steering has been lightened up quite a bit and even the doors swing more easily.
we have a 7 year old explorer, that still feels very substantial.
i still like driving it on the few occasions that i need it for.
it's on it's second kid as a daily driver

chuckfromli

Substantial, yes that is the word. A feeling that a car/truck is solid, well built and will run for a long time. Made out of quality materials/heavy. Not a vehicle that you have to dispose of after 100K.

I still like my Pathfinder, and that's a 2000. It is simply too good and too well maintained to sell or trade in.

I don't think I'm going to get that feeling from any compact crossover. Driving the RAV4, well.....it could just as well have been a Civic or a Prius.

blueiedgod

There is no way a CRV beats a new 6 cyl. Escape in acceleration. Consumer Reports shows CRV at over 10 seconds to 60 mph. The V6 Escape at around 8 seconds. I've seen similar numbers elsewhere also.

Both ex and I bought 2005 models, Escape and CR-V, respectively. Mine was 4 cylinder with a manual, hers was a V6 automatic. CR-V was faster to 60 than the Escape by 2 seconds, measured by the G-tech device.

The CR-V 4 cylinder with a manual has been tested by car magazines and does reach 60 mph in 8 seconds.

I don't follow vehicles with automatic, sorry, I don't go that way. There are certain things men are not supposed to do... not that there is anything wrong with that....

sr146260211

link title

The '01 CR-V hit 60 mph in 8.4 seconds and the quarter-mile mark in 16.6 seconds at 84 mph. Our '08 required 9.3 and 17.2 seconds, respectively

link title

Zero to 60 mph: 9.4 sec

link title

You'll do 0-60 mph in around 10 seconds

chuckfromli

Men who drive in traffic, cities, or congested suburbs, so what they have to do to keep their sanity.

bj02176

I have a 2008 CRV automatic and have had a 2005 v6 automatic Escape, it does seem like the CRV does accelerate as fast as the Escape. However the v6 in my my 2001 Tribute was a lot more perky.

I'm still looking to get a 2010 4 cyl Escape, wonder how that compares to the CRV. Nothing wrong with the CRV, 22,000 miles and no problems. Combined mileage with the trip computer is 23.9. I just like to trade every couple of years.

Still can't understand how the 2001 has rear drums, the 2005 rear disks, and the 2010 rear drums.

explorerx4

this has been said many times before, but here goes again, regarding the rear brakes.
most of the braking is done by the front brakes, 80% comes to mind, although if anyone has a better number, please post it.
rear drum brakes seem to require service less often than rear discs.
our 04 escape with 76k on it had the front brakes replaced around 50k, rears are still originals, and in the 'green zone' as per the last inspection.

chuckfromli

That may all be true regarding rear drum brakes. We have lived with them for years. Still, from an engineering and practical point of view, it makes no sense. If the competition all has rear discs, and rear discs stop better, especially in the rain, and your braking distance is a little worse than everybody else........well, something just tells me that Ford saved $20 per Escape by putting on the drum brakes.

Also, don't forget, warped rotors is a major problem for Ford. I don't know why, but they must buy the cheapest rotors they can find.

explorerx4

regarding the escape, ford has upgraded many features. it is a change in corporate philosophy. although the escape went back to rear drums, i doubt if it was to save a couple of bucks.
if you look at the drums on the new ones, they have a nice black powder coat type of finish.

baggs32

Also, don't forget, warped rotors is a major problem for Ford. I don't know why, but they must buy the cheapest rotors they can find.

Really chuck? I assume you have proof of this that you can show us then? That would be some useful information to all of us, me especially. You see, I've long had a theory that a gremlin snuck into our garage and switched the front rotors from my '98 ZX2 to our '96 Civic back when we had them because there's no way Honda buys cheap rotors right? Please prove me right!

All kidding aside, you do realize that warped rotors are mostly the direct result of repetitive hard stops over short periods of time. Heats them up too fast without enough time to cool you see. Most OEM rotors are not of the best quality but should all stay relatively flat if your driving habits permit them to. :shades:

blueiedgod

Men who drive in traffic, cities, or congested suburbs, so what they have to do to keep their sanity.

That is just an excuse...

I drove for years in and around NYC and remained sane and none of my limbs fell off.

Perhaps the congestion is the result of too many people driving, who shouldn't have been.

Had automatics been banned, there would have been fewer "stomp and steer" so called drivers on the roads, and a lot less congestion, and cleaner air. Some people just don't belong on the road, and automatics enable them to be loaded weapons in their hands.

Automatics were invented to attract the female buyer to then new automobile. In the essence automatic is just like a dress, should be owned by women, and maybe some men. Everyone else is just making excuses for wearing a dress :P

blueiedgod

link title

The '01 CR-V hit 60 mph in 8.4 seconds and the quarter-mile mark in 16.6 seconds at 84 mph. Our '08 required 9.3 and 17.2 seconds, respectively

link title

Zero to 60 mph: 9.4 sec

link title

You'll do 0-60 mph in around 10 seconds

The '01 referred to in the article was actually a 2002 model. I have the mid model upgraded 2005, and it does 0-60 in 8 seconds, according to the G-tech device.

The last model year "row your own" was an option was 2006.

chuckfromli

If you drove around NYC, then you know what I mean. I gave up a clutch years ago after I moved to Bklyn. and was still driving out to L.I. beaches on the Belt! Bumper to bumper in an '80 Pinto with a clutch, vinyl nterior and no air. But hey, it was only $4400 brand new, $4700 with the tax!

As for now, whatever. It's not like a crossover SUV is a sports car. Maybe somday I'll move out to the country, somewhere uncongested, and rediscover the joys of DIY.

chuckfromli

I don't know anything about the quality of Honda rotors. I have never owned a Honda, (except for my lawn mower which always starts on the furst pull!)

I have no scientific data, nor do I know of any in depth studies regarding Ford rotors, but I did own two Aerostars. The first was bought used, a 1988, and I don't remember much about that one as I only had it a few years. But the scond, a '93, was bought new. It seems the rotors were always warped. I had them cut and replaced several times. I heard somewhere, maybe from my mechanic, that this was a problem on all Fords.

It is hard sometimes to drive the car normally, and then have a avoid a puddle of slushy water in the winter. The brakes are just warm, but it seems that ice water warped the Ford rotors more than an other car I have ever had.

Nissan and Toyota rotors are excellent, from what I've seen. I also heard once that the American automakers buy their parts from the cheapest supplier, whereas the Japanese continue to buy from proven suppliers they trust, even if it costs a little more.

motoguy128

My experience is that Toyota skimps on their brakes. the brakes in my '91 Tercel were undersized and we were always needing ot have hte rotors turned on our Corollas. The mechanics often mentioned that you could only turn Toyota rotors once, while most other brands you could turn a couple of times.

I drove my parents '08 Toyota Camry. Maybe something was wrong with it, but I had 5 adults in the car and I need a LOT of muscle (an I'm a cyclist) had for even a moderate stop. I've had 5 peopel in our Altima and in my previous '04 accord and never needed searly that much brake pressure.

My parents also had issues with the wheel bearing and brakes on their '92 Camry and Highlander ('03 model I think???).

vg33e power

Well I may be hard on my brakes but I have owned several Hondas, a couple of Nissan Frontiers, and I now own a Mazda as well as the Ford Escape and I can say that all but the Nissans have warped and made my steering wheel shake. Hondas can only take one turning as long as they are not gouged, Nissnas never had to be turned or replaced, my current Mazda I do not know yet as it is the first time I will be doing brakes but I know for sure that the Ford Escape brakes caanot be turned and need to be replaced everytime you replace brake pads. I did it once and I am getting ready to do it again now at 63K miles.

berri

I've had Ford, Honda and Toyota recently and found the Ford's needed more frequent brake work, Honda the least. Personally, I'd prefer rear drum brakes because I think they are less hassle and expense. However, if I was driving in mountains I'd prefer rear discs.

vg33e power

berri,

What Ford vehicle and Honda vehicle are you comparing as far as longevity? I have had a 96 Civic, 99 Civic, 96 Accord, 02 Civic, 03 Accord and all have needed front brakes and resurfacing by 20K miles. As opposed to my wife's Ford Escape which needed brakes and rotors replaced at 32K miles. My 04 Nissan Frontier I used to have also did not need replcement of pads until about 34K miles and finally my current Mazda5 is needing pads and perhaps rotors after 23K miles.

By my own personal experience Honda and now my Mazda require more frequent brake work then that of our Ford Escape or my previous Nissan truck. Also up until 2002 and newer Hondas, Honda's brake performance was very weak needing a lot of effort to stop the vehicle and premature overheating which amounts to warped rotors just my opinion...and BTW I don't hate Honda I am after all a Honda Certified Parts Specialist that works for an Auto Group which includes Honda.

berri

CRV needed first brake job at 54K, Ody still on original brakes at 56K, Taurus needed brake work about every 20-22K, Windstar went about 24K (didn't get a second brake job because I got rid of that POS around 32K). The Explorer was the best Ford I owned on brakes (went about 28K, then another at 49K) but it had constant suspension issues. I won't get into vibrating rental car brakes because that wouldn't necessarily be fair.

vg33e power

WOW! 54K on the CR-V and 56K on the Ody and still going!!! I dont care if its a Honda or whatever other brand, that is awesome rates of longevity. I wish all vehicles lasted that long or longer. Maybe my figures have to do with my styleof driving...always speeding.

My wife is a far more safe driver always driving speed limit and very cautious besides the occasional passing on the freeway speeding...maybe thats why her brakes on her Escape (since she drives it 95% of the time) lasted as long as they did.

baggs32

except for my lawn mower which always starts on the furst pull!)

My 8 year old Craftsman with a Briggs & Stratton engine has never taken more than one pull to start and the only maintenance I've ever done on it is to put gas in it. A comparable Honda powered lawn mower will run you $100 to $200 more so I think I'll save my money.

I heard somewhere, maybe from my mechanic, that this was a problem on all Fords.

Probably because he just overcharged you for an even cheaper set of rotors and blaming the mfr will keep you coming back for more.

Again, driving style plays into rotor and pad longevity in a very big way. Our aforementioned Civic was primarily my wife's car and the brakes were being done on it more often than I'd like to remember. She also warped the rotors on one of our previous Escapes, and has slightly warped them on our '08 Escape. The cars I've driven primarily, all Fords and one Mazda, have never had warped rotors or worn pads. Therefore I can only chalk it up to her driving style which is very hard on the brakes. She's a "gas it all the way to the stop sign and slam on the brakes" style driver if you know what I mean.

She did drive our '06 Explorer for a couple of years and those rotors never did warp. Although that thing was a beast and had some excellent brakes I have to say. It's quite possible the rotors were of a better quality on that truck. Probably because it was a true truck and therefore was built to tow.

I won't argue that some mfrs do use better rotors than others. However I would argue that the quality varies from model to model, or even year to year, even within a specific mfr's lineup.

I also heard once that the American automakers buy their parts from the cheapest supplier, whereas the Japanese continue to buy from proven suppliers they trust, even if it costs a little more.

If the car was built here then chances are they bought the part from the same supplier that a domestic mfr bought it from. There are too many factors that play into warped rotors to make blanket statements. In addition to driving style, what about the pads? The engineering of the brake system's hydraulics? Even if all mfrs used the same exact rotors on all their vehicles, you would still see differences in longevity across the brands.

blueiedgod

WOW! blueiedgod you really are a work of art.... and an ignorant self centered individual!

What about handicapped "men" that "need" an automatic because...guess what? God only gave us four limbs and two of them are nonfuctional in which the only two limbs left (both arms) need to be used to steer, brake and accelerate.

I think the only one around here with a complex is yourself in which you "need" a manual transmission vehicle to make up for the lack of your manhood. Now go put on a dress and get a real "manly" car with a manual transmission and stop driving your "unmanly CR-V" you jack!

"Silly blueiedgod CR-V's are for sissies"

Hey, did I say anything about handicaps? Maybe with a doctor's note they can get a specialty made automatic. I am pretty sure I have seen vehicles modfified for people with non-functional limbs.

There is no reason that a healthy man, or a woman for that matter could not be bothered to shift gears and pay attention to the road. Automatics are the evil that allows people to eat, drink, call, text, read a book while behind the whell. It allows them to do anything but driving. And when perfectly healthy men start crying out "Mommy, I don't want to shift in traffic!!!" Mommy goes and gives them the bottle, or automatic in this case, rather than making them tough it out.

As to my CR-V, it is manly enough for me. I have taken it off roading plenty of times, and have taken it to the track, and have used it to haul stuff from Home Depot/Lowes... you may even call it jack of all trades... jack....

Come to think of it, all of my vehicles are 4 cylinder. The 88 Prelude is a 2.0L I4, the 83 Magna is a 750 cc V4, and the 05 CR-V is a 2.4 L I4. Maybe I am the sissy you have been implying because I care about the environment and my carbon footprint, and I only consume what I need. But, hey, I am sure you are a manly man and could care less about anyone but your self.

berri

WOW! 54K on the CR-V and 56K on the Ody and still going!!! I dont care if its a Honda or whatever other brand, that is awesome rates of longevity. I wish all vehicles lasted that long or longer

I've been rather surprised myself. I'm sure the van will need them one of these days. However, reading about all of the A/C and Tranny problems on Honda's as they age is starting to make me think I may need to dump them soon before they get expensive. One thing I will say about the Ford's I've had the past 10 years, they all had really comfortable seats that were great on the back during long drives and while they have had more repairs than my Honda or Toyota vehicles, they have mostly been relatively minor and not too expensive, although the problems seemed to climb geometrically after around 60K. The Honda dealers here gouge you! I think I like the Toyota's the best, but I'm not particularly fond of the RAV-4, I think it needs a redesign or at least a major updating.

kyfdx

95K before I replaced pads on my '02...

explorerx4

of course a/c, power steering/brakes/windows/locks, etc are the stuff of tough man contests. :P

alamocity

Wow, I am amazed that the hosts have allowed this to continue as it has nothing to do with the discussion between these two vehicles not to mention the name calling that has occurred.

stever

This has been a contentious discussion for literally years, even more so than most of the other comparison topics here. But the participants are usually pretty good with their give and take in spite of the heated arguments.

A deep breath would be in order.

vg33e power

...SIGHING....

I feel better now!

Now lets get back into the ring...LOL!

stever

Every time I see your handle I think of Nissan and the V6 in my Quest. Are you a closet agitator? :shades:

motoguy128

I've always gotten at least 40k miles out of a set of brakes. If you get less... personally, I think you need ot review your braking habits. Mainly, not staying in the same place after comming to a complete stop. This is what warps rotors. The pads sitting on the hot rotor cause it to cool unenvenly. I think it's also a sign of the overcrowded roads in most metro areas. Thankfully, I've left that rat race.

As for manual transmissions. I enjoy driving them...for a while. But with my commute of 8-10 stops signs or lights over a 3 miles drive...it gets very tedious. It definitely has it's advantages, but with the newer automatics and CVT's it's claim over better mileage is no loger true in many cases. Also factor in lower resale value (demand is very low for manuals), limited dealer inventories, and on long trips almost every manula turns much higher RPM while makes for less relaxed crusing. In my last car, the difference was almost 1000 RPM. In the Honda Civic, it's at least 500 RPM and highway mileage is lower.

Some folks need to get over themselves, and realize at some point, shoving on a 3rd pedal is not nessesary, and is slowly becomming obsolete by better technology.

Yes race cars use manuals...although F1 cars are semi-automatic because they shift faster than a human can otherwise. But they use manuals because they are lighter, more compact, simplier, and transmit power more directly. Automatics like the VW DSG blur the line between manual and automatic.

At some point arguing for manual transmissions will be a little like complaining because the engine has FI, automatic chokes, vacuum assits brakes and an electric starter. ALL of these technologies were questioned when they first came out in their initial development cycles. While automatics aren't new, it's not easy ot better thte perfomance on a manual transmission... but it will eventually be accomplished.

On topic...as the the Escape. To each his own, but it lookes like a mini Explorer...which is not a compliment. It's boring and boxy. If you like that great, but I like a little bit of styling in my vehciles... and less chrome in the front. Ford has greatly improved theri vehciles... but not enouhg for me to buy one.

baggs32

Mainly, not staying in the same place after comming to a complete stop. This is what warps rotors. The pads sitting on the hot rotor cause it to cool unenvenly.

That's only partially right. You have to overheat them to the point that they would cool unevenly first. Driving style still dictates that too but just sitting in one spot with the pads up against the rotors does not always warp a rotor.

We have hills, some very big and some not, everywhere around here so the brakes get heated up pretty darn fast which doesn't help. If the terrain where you live is more on the flat side then your brakes are destined to last longer. Just one more of the many factors that cause warped rotors.

vg33e power

I am sorry Steve call me ignorant or immature but I dont get your comment or your reference to Nissan and the V6 in your Quest, can you please clarify. I don't agitate conversations I just like to voice my opinon as everyone else does, after all isn't a forum meant for that? If we all shared the same view the entire world would live in peace and also be very boring.