Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





CR-V vs Escape

1269270272274275278

Comments

  • Recalls are indicators of many things, INCLUDING quality. Not always, but it IS one of the factors. I don't know where you are getting that it isn't.

    And yes, the recalls are relatively close over the past five years, but then again, these are NEW CR-V models you are comparing to an ESTABLISHED Escape model. I would fully expect, as would many other (I hope), that you have more recall issues early in a model's development.

    Honda has done just that, as there haven't been ANY recalls on my 2005 CR-V, the fourth year of its generational run. The Escape, on the other hand, is STILL getting recalls after 6+ years and counting. Sorry, baggs, but you are comparing Apples to Oranges on this one. Furthermore, Ford needs to show it can produce a quality model if they expect people to bail them out.
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,210
    And yes, the recalls are relatively close over the past five years, but then again, these are NEW CR-V models you are comparing to an ESTABLISHED Escape model.

    The Escape was all new in 2001. I gave you 2002 and up. One year on the market makes it established now? :confuse:

    Honda has done just that, as there haven't been ANY recalls on my 2005 CR-V, the fourth year of its generational run.

    The NHTSA says otherwise:

    Make / Models : Model/Build Years:
    HONDA / CR-V 2005

    Recall Number: 04V526000
    Summary:
    ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES, THE OCCUPANT POSITION DETECTION SYSTEM'S SIDE SENSOR IS NOT INSTALLED IN THE CORRECT POSITION AND MAY FAIL TO SHUT OFF THE PASSENGER'S SIDE IMPACT AIRBAG IF THE OCCUPANT IS OUT-OF-POSITION.
    Consequence:
    IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH, SUCH AN OUT-OF POSITION OCCUPANT MAY BE INJURED BY A DEPLOYING SIDE AIRBAG.
    Remedy:
    DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE PASSENGER'S SEAT-BACK PAD WHICH INCUDES THE OCCUPANT POSITION DETECTION SYSTEM SENSOR. THE RECALL BEGAN ON ON NOVEMBER 19, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT HONDA AT 1-800-999-1009.
    Notes:
    HONDA RECALL NO. P49. CUSTOMERS CAN ALSO CONTACT THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION¿S AUTO SAFETY HOTLINE AT 1-888-DASH-2-DOT (1-888-327-4236).


    Furthermore, Ford needs to show it can produce a quality model if they expect people to bail them out.

    Your beloved CR ranks the Fusion above the Accord. Check out the latest JD Power ratings too. Ford had the most vehicles at the top of their segments. Quality has improved greatly and you're just going to have to face that fact now. There is no more quality gap. That's not to say there won't be one in the future again, but it's gone for now.

    I would fully expect, as would many other (I hope), that you have more recall issues early in a model's development.

    Completely false. Often times it takes a while for a problem to crop up and that wouldn't necessarily happen early in the model's life cycle.

    Recalls are indicators of many things, INCLUDING quality. Not always, but it IS one of the factors. I don't know where you are getting that it isn't.


    Maybe the quality of a specific part but parts fail and they fail for all mfrs. Recalls are almost always issued for safety reasons and have more to do with the durability of a part than it's overall quality which don't go hand in hand. Sometimes form comes before function.
  • twaintwain Posts: 185
    Normally it's the man who won't be caught dead in a minivan, but I've been hearing this applied to woman more and more often.
    ------------------------------------

    But minivans have become too large and heavy too. Unless you have a family of 6. IMO, new vehicles like the Mazda5 and Kia Rondo are the way to go. And they'll carry 6 too. :)
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    IMO, new vehicles like the Mazda5 and Kia Rondo are the way to go. And they'll carry 6 too.

    Having spent time in a 5, you really need to get a 4-door 5-passenger vehicle if you need decent seating for 4 (the back seat is small in the 5, to me). For 6, the 4 rear passengers better be 5'3" or less.

    Having owned an Accord, driven the family minivan, and sat in a Mazda 5, I'd pick the conventional car or minivan over the microvan.

    The Mazda5 gets 21/26 MPG, and has 157 horsepower (bad power to MPG ratio). The Sienna has 266 horsepower, seats 7/8 people quite comfortably, and gets 19/26 MPG.

    If I had the money to spend on a conventional van, even if I only had a family of 4, I'd get the Sienna. 1 MPG combined lower, 100+ extra horsepower, MUCH MUCH more room and comfort.
  • I know there are probably a variety of opinions on this topic, but here goes:
    I'm trying to decide whether to buy a used Escape or CRV. Safety and reliability are the most important factors to me, 4 cylinder engine is fine. For my budget ($15K or less), I could get a fairly new (05/06) Escape with low mileage very easily. A CRV, on the other hand, would likely be a 2002 or 2003 model with a bit more miles. Is the CRV worth paying a bit extra or getting a bit older car?
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Posts: 2,803
    I know there are probably a variety of opinions on this topic, but here goes:
    I'm trying to decide whether to buy a used Escape or CRV. Safety and reliability are the most important factors to me, 4 cylinder engine is fine. For my budget ($15K or less), I could get a fairly new (05/06) Escape with low mileage very easily. A CRV, on the other hand, would likely be a 2002 or 2003 model with a bit more miles. Is the CRV worth paying a bit extra or getting a bit older car?


    Test drive both. The 4 cylinder CR-V compares more favorably with the V6 Escape. The 4 cylinder Escape compares to horse drawn buggy in terms of acceleration and driving dynamics. :P
  • Won't fit into the current Escape, according to this month's Car & Driver (Oct. 07). In the meantime, Honda has upped the HP numbers for the 2.4 to 177 and 190 for the new Accord. I'm hoping the 190 horse version makes it into the CR-V in the next year or two. THEN what are people going to say when this four banger has equal HP numbers to Ford's 3 liter V6?
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,210
    The solution is the PIP Duratec30 which we should see at the Detroit show in January if it's still in the works (the TwinForce may have made Mulally change his mind about that).

    Essentially the PIP is a reworked version of the current D30 and adds about 20 horses, some torque, more refinement, and much better fuel economy. The '09 Escape will most likely also get the new 2.5L I4 which puts out either 190 or 200 HP, is smoother than the current 2.3L and, again, gets much better fuel economy.

    I doubt that they'll put a TF in the Escape so I'd expect the PIP is still on track. Although news of it on the dedicated Ford forums has died down substantially over the past few months.

    These two motors are going in the freshened, inside and out, '09 Fusion as well with a TF I4 for the sport version(s).

    The next Escape will most likely be the Kuga you can see at the current Frankfurt show if rumors hold true too.

    Oh, and the Escape will get a new 5 or 6-speed tranny with the new engines too.
  • When did the current Escape debut again?
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,210
    February IIRC.

    Many people, I being one of them, were disappointed with the drivetrain for the current model because it had not changed at all. It seems that Mulally and Fields have listened, but nothing's been officialy announced yet so time will tell.
  • Oh, i mean the Escape in general. The "new" Escape is not much newer than my "new" Accord for 2006. A facelift, a small change here or there, but nothing new to hang their hat on. Was it 2001?
  • stevedebistevedebi LAPosts: 3,785
    "Oh, i mean the Escape in general. The "new" Escape is not much newer than my "new" Accord for 2006. A facelift, a small change here or there, but nothing new to hang their hat on. Was it 2001?"

    Yes, 2001 was the first model year for this basic design.

    That's better than the Ford Ranger, which hasn't been redesigned since around 1990 or so (except for sheet metal & etc)...

    Since this is a comparison forum, we might note that the CR-V has been completely redesigned twice since 2001.
  • That's what I was sitting here thinking; three CR-Vs to one Escape (although 2001 was the last model-year for Gen I)

    image
    image
    image
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,210
    That's what I was sitting here thinking; three CR-Vs to one Escape (although 2001 was the last model-year for Gen I)

    Most likely a big reason the Duratec35 doesn't fit in the Escape. It's an older design which was engineered long before the D35 was conceived.
  • I think the 221 hp version in the Fusion would be a healthy upgrade, personally. These arent about being hot-rods. More economy should be Escape's mantra. Its V6 is adequate in power.
  • I did some research on the Twin Force I4 and it sounds nice, and then again it sounds too nice to be true. I really don't see Ford sticking a twin turbo vehicle in a vehicle like the Escape. The prohibitive cost and decreased reliability in addition to decreased fuel economy don't seem worth it in this class.

    Also, Ford is claiming MPG equal to a diesel. I would be amazed to see this, as diesel contains about 10% more energy per gallon, which leads to a diesel being about 15% more efficient, hence the better power and fuel economy.

    Ultimately, I predict we may see some smoke but not a lot of fire. The next time Ford does something innovative will be the first time they have been successful at it since introducing the original Taurus.
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,210
    I think the 221 hp version in the Fusion would be a healthy upgrade, personally. These arent about being hot-rods. More economy should be Escape's mantra. Its V6 is adequate in power.


    Well the PIP is supposed to produce ~240 HP AND get better gas mileage than the current 200 and 221 HP versions of the D30 in the Escape and Fusion. It's no D35 or Honda engine but it should be a welcome upgrade.
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,210
    I did some research on the Twin Force I4 and it sounds nice, and then again it sounds too nice to be true.

    I agree.

    I really don't see Ford sticking a twin turbo vehicle in a vehicle like the Escape. The prohibitive cost and decreased reliability in addition to decreased fuel economy don't seem worth it in this class.

    Actually the TF is supposed to be priced the same as a V6 and if you've been paying attention for the last say, 15 years, turbos aren't unreliable anymore.

    Also, Ford is claiming MPG equal to a diesel. I would be amazed to see this, as diesel contains about 10% more energy per gallon, which leads to a diesel being about 15% more efficient, hence the better power and fuel economy.

    Not equal to, but rather LIKE a diesel. Most numbers I've seen point to 33% better than a comparably powered V6.

    Ultimately, I predict we may see some smoke but not a lot of fire. The next time Ford does something innovative will be the first time they have been successful at it since introducing the original Taurus.

    You may have noticed that Ford will be releasing a new tranny similar to Audi's DSG at the same time the TF motors will be released. If the TF and this tranny both live up to the rumors, Ford is going to have some top notch, if not class leading, powertrains in a year or two.
  • Turbos have certainly become more reliable but certain manufacturers, specifically ones known for producing reliable cars (Honda, Toyota, etc.) stay away from them.

    As for Ford's new transmission, again, I'll believe it when I see it. These reports of new engines and transmissions are coming from Ford. Once other sources start applauding them, I'll start believing it might be true. I'd LOVE for one of the domestic manufacturers to start producing quality and innovative products, but they are about 20 years behind at this point.
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,210
    specifically ones known for producing reliable cars (Honda, Toyota, etc.) stay away from them.


    The new RDX has a turbo I4.
  • stevedebistevedebi LAPosts: 3,785
    "The new RDX has a turbo I4."

    And pretty poor MPG compared to the CR-V (same size vehicle).
  • Yep, but that's an Acura (I know, I know, it's a Honda at heart, but it's marketed to a VERY different crowd...and it's Honda's first). And like steve pointed out, the mileage is terrible compared to the non-turbo CR-V, about the same as a Pilot, in fact.
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,210
    Yep, but that's an Acura (I know, I know, it's a Honda at heart, but it's marketed to a VERY different crowd...and it's Honda's first).

    So since you stated that mfrs who make reliable engines tend to stay away from turbos, would that make Acura a mfr of unreliable engines then? Thanks for clearing that up. :P

    You guys can call it whatever you want. That engine was engineered by Honda. Yes it is marketed to a different crowd, but it came from the same mfr. Let's call a duck, a duck folks. ;)
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Posts: 2,803
    Both Honda and Toyota have had turbo engines on the market for a long time. They just chose not to bring them to the US.

    Check out the Domestic Japanese market, and there are plenty of turbo powered econoboxes. Most of them are very small 4 cylinder or 3 cylinder engines driving cars that are small, but fun to drive.
  • I don't know, it's the first year for this particular engine. I do know Acura decided to go this route because the variable geometry turbo is a better solution because of less turbo lag and better fuel economy. Still, turbos are VERY sensitive, such as you are supposed to warm them up and let them cool down for the bearings, in addition to driving conservatively for the first couple miles, which for some people is their ENTIRE trip. None of that has changed as far as I'm aware.
  • stevedebistevedebi LAPosts: 3,785
    "You guys can call it whatever you want. That engine was engineered by Honda. Yes it is marketed to a different crowd, but it came from the same mfr. Let's call a duck, a duck folks."

    I don't care to whom it is marketed. In my opinion getting Pilot-class MPG from a CR-V class vehicle makes it a turkey, not a duck.

    Anybody seen the sales figures for the RX?
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    Been a while since I visited this room. Used to own a 2001 Escape XLT V6. After over 70,000 trouble free miles I felt like something else. Used this Escape as an SUV, towed my watercraft, visited the Cascade mountain range to skii and fish. Wife and I liked this vehicle so much she opted for a Mazda version Tribute V6 loaded with all options. Now it has just over 50,000 trouble free miles.. I use this now to do the work my Escape used to do.
    To dromedarius.. "Domestic" automakers have been producing reliable vehicles for years now, and for a lot less $$ than comparable Japanese makers. I know I am proof. I now own a sedan from a domestic automaker that also has about 30,000, once again.. trouble free miles on it ;) C'mon into the now....
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    Ford is making some good products these days, no doubt. I'll be eager to hear from ya after another 50k though - you're barely broken in at 50k or 70k! :)

    The Escape and Tribute are about 8 years old now, so they should be working their way down in price. Its not because they are bad, but people pay more for "new." To get acceleration comparable to the 4-cyl CR-V you must step to a V6 Escape*, however, which raises the entry price and lowers the fuel economy.

    * I say this based on Motor Trend's testing. Unless the Escape has found some hidden horses or lost weight (has it? I dunno!) the 10+ seconds it took to reach that merging speed of 60 MPH is higher than the CR-V which runs with a 2.4L 4-cylinder. I used the same source because they use the same launch methods. No, these aren't hot-rods, but considering the last (and only) test of the 4-cylinder Escape had 14 seconds or more to 60, I'd say the V6 is a necessity in that vehicle.

    All that said, when the Escape comes back with the 230hp V6 and Twin-Force 2.5L 4-cyl, it'll at least be a powertrain contender.
  • stevedebistevedebi LAPosts: 3,785
    "I use this now to do the work my Escape used to do. "

    Well, scape2, I have changed sides, though I still think the CR-V is a fine vehicle.

    I'm now driving a 2008 Escape Hybrid. Mine is an AWD. I considered the CR-V when purchasing, but I like the hybrid powertrain and I still wanted an SUV. So the Escape was pretty much it for me. I considered waiting for the 2009 (rumored) diesel CR-V, but with the cost of diesel at about 70 cents more than regular here in L.A., it wouldn't have worked out cash wise.

    The hybrid has a 150K, 10 year warranty on the hybrid powertrain components, which should be plenty for me. I intend to keep it a while, so I'll probably purchase the extended warranty (I bought an extended warranty with my last CR-V as well).

    My CR-V was a Gen 2, so I haven't owned a Gen 3 CR-V, but the 2008 Escape Hybrid is VASTLY quieter on the road than my Gen 2. It is my understanding that the 2008 model Escape has more sound insulation than previous models. I can tell you that the hood and lift gate are heavier than I would expect, and I can see that they have put a lot of sound insulation under the hood.

    Speaking of sound, the sound system is much better on the Escape (I do have the Audiophile system). Again, I'm comparing to a Gen 2 EX.

    The Escape Hybrid also has the spare under the rear (outside the car), because the batteries are under the cargo area. In many ways I think this is better than having the spare inside the car, considering that the vehicle would have to be unloaded to get to the tire.

    The FEH is also a little bit smoother than the Gen 2 (not much), and I have WAY more leg room (I have to more the seat forward). It does have less rear legroom, but it is sufficient for my needs.

    I would also say that the CR-V has better interior space.

    For those interested, it is a bit too early to tell about the long term, but so far I am getting about 32 City and 30 highway MPG, very respectable for an AWD, in my opinion.

    In the handling the department, I think that the Gen 2 handled better than my 2008 FEH. I can't say exactly why I feel this way, but that is my perception. There is nothing wrong with the FEH handling; it is just that I consider the Honda to be more tuned to holding the road. It's a perception more than anything else.

    One more feature that I like is having a 110V outlet in the front seat, though I think this may be available only on the hybrid Escape.

    The last item is pretty subjective, but I personally prefer the styling of the Escape. I find the Gen 3 to be a bit too "bubble shaped", and I don't care for the nose job.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    I've seen differing opinions on one issue with the hybrid Escape, and I'd love your input! How does acceleration compare to regular models, or your gen-2 CR-V? I've seen wildly varying acceleration numbers (although I can't recall any right now), and was hoping for a real-world response. Does it lose power noticeably if the batteries are somewhat depleted?

    Sorry for playing 20 Questions, you're just the first person I know with one. ;) Congrats on the new car!
Sign In or Register to comment.