Howdy, Stranger!

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

2007 Honda CR-V



  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Even though the CX7 is de-tuned from the MazdaSpeed6 (and MazdaSpeed3) model, I would still stick with the best octane you can find for a turbo.

    Turbos basically increase the effective compression ratio because the incoming air is more dense. They dial back the compression ratio for this reason precisely, but not enough to go with regular fuel. Direct injection helps cool the intake charge somewhat, but I still wouldn't do it.

    Same for the RDX.

    Mazda6 wagon is nice, check out the press-button rear seatback release. The V6 runs on regular, too. But no AWD.

  • stevedebistevedebi LAPosts: 3,719
    "I don't think 4 ft would make a huge difference. "

    It makes a huge difference. My wife's 2002 Civic has a 37 ft radius, and when driving and parking it, the difference really stands out.

    I think the radius increase is due to a longer and wider wheelbase?
  • lahirilahiri Posts: 394
    CX7 needs premium gas and its MPG rating isn't as good as CR-V's. Still, MPG rating is decent for its size. I don't know about rebates on CX7 - check Edmunds' pricing as well as Carsdirect's pricing before you buy.
  • I think the turning radius is affected more by the taller, wider tires... So, in essence, you are trading turning radius for a little better handling..

    You see it a lot in FWD, sporty sedans... the bigger the tires get, the worse the turning radius..

    Moderator - Prices Paid, Lease Questions, SUVs

  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    I don't know exactly why the PR guys from Honda suggested that $25K number, but the F-series engine from the Accord was 93mm longer than the B20 and would not have fit in the engine bay. Furthermore, the F-series engine was not produced at the Suzuka lines or any of the supporting plants.

    To solve the problem, Honda developed that sequential cylinder casting method we've discussed in other threads. That project involved developing a dedicated variant of the B-series engines for use in only the CR-V and the use of a cylinder design which had been proposed decades earlier, but never before perfected.

    I have no idea how expensive it would have been to reshape the CR-V's engine compartment and shift logistics for the F-series engines, but if developing a unique engine specifically for the CR-V was the less expensive method, I gotta figure your Accord suggestion wasn't cheap.

    As for moving to a torquier engine, that was a concession to the NA markets. Originally, dealers in the US had rejected the CR-V. It was developed as a world vehicle first. And, in other parts of the world, the 2002 CR-V does still use a 2.0L engine. In fact, even the 2007 CR-V uses the 2.0L engine. So, yes, Honda has made changes for us. They are simply changes within a reasonble scope.

    However, as much as consumer feedback may be important to a company, there are hard realities at work. The B-eries vs F-series example above is just one of them. And this particular type of feedback has been seen before. Back in 2002, these forums were aflutter with the same remarks I'm reading today. Only, it was the Escape causing the V6 commotion, not the RAV4. Honda ignored all the V6 fever and created another best-seller using a 4 cyl.

    I figure... the more companies start splitting up the V6 market segment, the less reason Honda has for going there. These companies leave the highly profitable 4 cyl segment wide open.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Well, this time (as to why people are complaining) it's not so much what the competition is offering as much as it is a new model launch lacking any new powertrain options. The Element also got the 10hp boost so the outgoing CR-V would have gotten that as well anyway.

    FWIW, I think the 2.4l is fine. But I'm saying that if enough people ask for more, Honda will offer it.

  • stevedebistevedebi LAPosts: 3,719
    "I think the turning radius is affected more by the taller, wider tires... So, in essence, you are trading turning radius for a little better handling.."

    Yup, you nailed it. That same thought came to me over lunch. It's the tires... they have to design the turning radius so as to not run into the wheel wells.

    I'm not sure the move from 16 to 17 inches was worth 4 feet of turning radius. :surprise:
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    The new tire is wider but also a lot taller. So the overall diamater grew a lot. Think about when you turn the steering wheel all the way left or right - they need clearance in the tire wells for those big tires (and for the full suspension travel).

    They probably could not go with small tires because they wouldn't have had much ground clearance.

    The old one had a great turning radius, very tight. Not any more.

  • I've been thinking, too.. ;)

    The new model sits a little lower, with a lower step-in height... This might contribute to the increased turning radius even more than the larger tires... reducing room in the wheel wells, even more.. (and, improving handling vis the lower COG).

    Moderator - Prices Paid, Lease Questions, SUVs

  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    "FWIW, I think the 2.4l is fine. But I'm saying that if enough people ask for more, Honda will offer it."

    See, I'm not sure that's true. It takes more than just demand for a V6. There must also be a decrease in demand for the I4. Until they start losing sales, Honda doesn't have much incentive to change.

    For that matter, I expect we'll see a nose job long before we see a V6.
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,652
    Well, I wouldn't go that far...

    Would I have preferred for her to have gotten a Subie? Yeah, for number of reasons. Am I sorry she got the CRV? No, not at all. If she were to get another car other than a Subie, a Honda would have been my first choice by far. So far it's been a great car for her. No complaints whatsoever. :)

  • Actually you may be reading what industry writers were saying about 2 years ago. Granted, Mitsubishi is not coming back like a ball of fire but in the current worldwide climate who is? on the plus side they are now being financed (mostly) by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Mitsubishi Bank of Tokyo and Mitsubishi Holding Co. All 3 companies have a vested interest (especially MHI)in the success of MMC. While the monthly sales are small compared to giants like Toyota or Honda they are increasing slightly And they, like Mazda, have eliminated fleet sales for the time being. The plant in Normal Ill. is currently building Galants for export to Russia, South America and the middle east, all equipped with the 4 cyl Mivec and a Ralliart Galant was just released in the N.A. market. As for the new Outlander, the platform was actually designed by Mitsubishi but stole,oooops...I mean "borrowed" by dodge for the caliber. It's Mitsubishi technology thats responsible for the success of the caliber. The completely new Lancer ES should be in North America by March 07 followed by the Ralliart version in July then the Evo X in October 07. All using the same basic platform so it can't be that bad, can it? Lets just hope that Mitsubishi doesn't have to get a new CEO from Lockheed or somewhere like that.
  • drive62drive62 Posts: 637
    Ah....500.00 over invoice?

    MAYBE three years from now!

    Within three months of the release of the 2G the vehicle was selling well below MSRP in this market. Less than a year after it's intro it was selling at invoice. I fully expect the same with this model. Competition among dealers is a wonderful thing. YMMV.
  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 17,356
    That didn't happen here but I guess things could change?
  • Being in the market for this SUV there are a lot of choices to make. Styling, extended warranty from GM. & FORD. Vs.Paying msrp. for the HONDA name.
  • stevedebistevedebi LAPosts: 3,719
    "(and, improving handling vis the lower COG)."

    I never had any problems with COG on my 2003; the handling was one of the strong points of the Gen2 CR-V. Of course, the 34 ft turning radius was another strong point. :P
  • c_hunterc_hunter Posts: 4,487
    There were deals to be had here as well on the previous CR-V back in 02/03. I haven't ever paid much more than invoice on any vehicle, and Honda/Acura isn't any different in my experience. Of course, I have the luxury of having a low-price no-haggle volume dealer a couple hours away, and they are always my fallback if the local dealers don't want to deal on price. Most times, the local dealers will come very close to the price from the volume dealer.
  • bodble2bodble2 Posts: 4,519
    You have to take into consideration whence the message comes. If you talk to a salesman/dealer, every vehicle is in demand, and they are doing you a big fat favour if they can get you a few hundreds off. :mad:
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    "Within three months of the release of the 2G the vehicle was selling well below MSRP in this market. Less than a year after it's intro it was selling at invoice."

    If you back through the posts in the "Prices Paid" thread, you'll find a number of people getting deals ($500-1,000 off MSRP) in mid 2003 - roughly 18 months after release.

    However, you'll also find plenty of posts where dealers are still getting MSRP.

    Invoice deals really didn't start on a regular basis until the 2004 models pushed down the prices on the left-over 2003s.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Perhaps you and I define "handling" differently, but the outgoing model had quite a bit of body roll and numb, overboosted steering. That plus 205/70 tires (for the first few model years) didn't exactly yield the best handling.

    It was fine by truck standards, so I guess it depends on what measuring tape you apply.

    But coming from a car...the lack of a dead pedal plus the high seat only exacerbated the tipsy feeling.

    I expect this new model will handle a whole lot better. It's lower COG and wider track, plus better tires and a dead pedal, should add up to a significant improvement, at least to me.

Sign In or Register to comment.