2001 - 2006 Honda CR-Vs

icdchess

The one I noticed was moderate and even some pretty minor ones, but it seemed odd to me that the very same service manager who took my car in, never once asked how severe the inclines were, nor did he tell me straight out that it was normal. Instead, he signed in the car at 5:30 one afternoon, and called me the next morning to say the car was "ready".
Steve

isellhondas

This "rolling backwards" keeps coming up.

ALL cars will roll backwards on hills if you take your foot off the brake!

Back in the fifties, Studebakers had a "hill holder" they touted quite a bit and some Subarus have this feature too.

Other than that...it's normal.

kyfdx

The "hill holder" on Subarus was for a manual transmission. If you pushed in the clutch and stepped on the brake, then the brake wouldn't release until you started to let out the clutch. If the car is on slight grade, and the transmission is in Drive, then it should hold somewhat. The degree of grade is the issue. Ask them to try a similar car to yours. It is possible you are having transmission (torque converter?) problems. If you are on a very slight grade, and the car rolls backwards freely, then that seems like a problem. If the SA didn't inquire as to the degree of grade, then it sounds like he was blowing you off.

regards,
kyfdx

ateixeira

8/150k, is that not long enough a warranty? I mean, c'mon, what does the Civic Hybrid come with?

By then I doubt many will be with the original owners.

-juice

varmint

I've read several posts asking about "roll-back", but I've never read of problems linked to it. Based on that, I think it's just a quirk.

icvci

My dad had a Bonneville ST in 1989, it would always roll backwards on hills. I thought it odd but, we never did anything with it. It ran very well over 180,000 miles with nothing but very basic service.

I wouldn't worry about it.

ateixeira

An automatic can roll backwards unless the torque converter is locked up, but that only happens at speed and in numerically higher gears.

-juice

stevedebi

The comparison is between the hybrid and normal gasoline engine. I expect over 200,000 on my CR-V; if it were hybrid I would have to expect to put an additional 3K into it at 150,000 or 8 years, plus the original 3K premium to have this technology.

I'm not saying it's excessive or unusual, just that it is a factor in purchase consideration.

Also keep in mind that there is no really long term information on the hybrid technology - the oldest are only 5 years or so old, and the technology is changing somewhat.

Some people purchase a car in it's first year of production; I ususally wait until the second year. The prius fits in this category for me.

kyfdx

How much more do you think you'll have to put into the CRV to get 200K? I've had seven Hondas, and I think they are great, but most all of them will need major work, if you plan on going past 150K. They are great vehicles, but they aren't Toyota 2WD pickups. I see very few Civics or Accords, etc. with over 150K, compared to say Toyota Corollas, Tacomas, etc..

That said, the battery pack does bring in an additional cost that non-hybrids don't have. I just think your expectations of the CRV are a little optimistic.

regards,
kyfdx

skippyspaniel2

Well built and responsive. It handles well and my wife loves it in the snow. BUT I really find the seats really uncomfortable. After 10-15 mins of driving, I feel tense and my back feels discomfort. I am 6 foot 1" 190lbs. I cannot drive the CRV for more than 15 mins.
I actually drive a Ford Focus as my primary car, and although have not had trouble free experience, I find the Focus much more comfartable and can take it for 6+ hour road trips. My 2c

varmint

Skippy - Do you position the seats like a car, or like a truck? I ask because my wife initially found the seats in our CR-V uncomfortable. Once she got over her irrational fear of sitting upright, she found it much better.

kyfdx

I'm sure you didn't use that term when counseling your dear wife on her seating problem. Irrational... I can hear my wife blowing a gasket right now...LOL

autosaurus

I also am finding the driving position uncomfortable and I use my CRv every day doing about 70+ miles /day. I can't really explain exactly what is uncomfortable but I suspect it's the entire drivers set up, relationships re wheel angle, seat angle distance etc..etc..

Its a great car in many ways but am really ndisappointed with the driving comfort.

I also have a loud rattle in the sunroof whren it's tilted up. Has anyone experienced this?..and if so what was the problem. Mine has about 1,200 miles on it thus far.
Thanks

stevedebi

Well, it will take a while, but we'll see. And yes, all cars require more maintenance as time goes by.

Actually, I know of several hondas in my extended family that went over 200K. Most recently a 1984 civic that was sold with 275K on the odometer.

vman05

Thanks for the info kizhe. It's good to know I wouldn't be wasting my money on something that's useless

ateixeira

steve: if so, you keep your cars a lot longer than the average owner. I've been on a 7 year cycle, about, so the battery warranty would cover me the whole time. YMMV.

200k with no work is optimistic. JDP's durability study says the average vehicle has 2.7 problems after just 5 years. If you're talking 8+ years, even the most reliable brands will have issues, for sure.

The engine may still run, but you'll have water pumps and other accessories fail before the 200k point, IMO.

-juice

stevedebi

Yes, I'm sure it will need some work, but at least the car will support adding work to it. I got a Ford to 130K once, but was literally unable to continue with it unless it was rebuilt from scratch. And I considered that a GOOD Ford...

ateixeira

I got 107k out of my Escort before it was totalled. Before that it needed an A/C condenser, at $700 I nearly had to "total" it myself. )

-juice

sharona1973

I am very interested in getting a CR-V. However, I use my car a lot for my work and drive about 100 miles per day, averaging probably about 25k-30k a year for work. At this rate, it would only take about 4 years to get up to 100k on the car. This is a new line of work for me and I'm a little bummed out that I might have to get a new car every 5 years. My old job did not require driving and I only put 15,000 miles on my car per year.

Is the CR-V reliable enough to last past 150,000 miles? Kinda bummed out that I'll be putting that many miles on a car (any car) in such a short time. Anyone else in this same position? Or am I wrong about average miles put on cars?

Thanks!!

varmint

Consumer Reports and JD Powers have both rated the CR-V highly in terms of quality and reliability. CR actually ranks it the most reliable of the small SUVs. Historically, the majority of Hondas have done very in terms of longevity. So, while there are never any promises, I'd say the CR-V is as good a bet as you can place.

ateixeira

You may want to consider a fuel-sipping small sedan, like a Corolla or Civic. With 30k miles per year, the fuel costs will add up quickly. If you need a wagon try a Matrix.

Also, range is important, you may have to fill your tank every 3 days! Look at highway mileage and gas tank capacity for longer range.

If diesel is cheap near you I'd add the Golf/Jetta TDI. Range is excellent and diesels tend to last forever.

-juice

kyfdx

Unless you need the 4WD, there are much better choices for long commutes. As much as I like mine, if I had to go that far, I'd be in a Corolla or VW TDI.. (Okay, probably not the VW, what was I thinking?). Also, since you are going to drive it until it is virtually worth nothing, I'd take a serious look at one to two year old cars. No sense paying new car depreciation for a car that will rack up miles that quick.

regards,
kyfdx

varmint

A little background: The other vehicle Sherona is considering is the Escape HEV. In another thread she posted that reliability was her biggest concern with that one.

ateixeira

Ford makes a PZEV Focus wagon with a peppy 2.3l, again I think that would be a better choice for distance cruising vs. an Escape.

Thing is, these small SUVs are good in urban environments with big pot holes, or rural roads with gravel or dirt. For smooth pavement and highway commuting, you're not really taking advantage of the 8.1" of clearance or RT4WD, yet you get 25mpg and range suffers.

Just my 2 cents'.

-juice

aggie1995

Like everyone else said. Look at something with better mileage ie. Civic, Corolla, Prius.

if you can wait until the end of the year, the Honda Accord Hybrid might be available.

Just a word of advice. If you get reimbursed for mileage take 1/2 of the mileage check you get and put it into a savings account. Don't touch it until you need to buy a new car. You should have enough there including your trade-in to pay for a new car cash (almost).

If they don't pay mileage. track all your driving and deduct it on your taxes. (Consult a tax advisor though). This can add up to some big savings also.

If you do get a CR-V you should be able to get at least 150k out of it. So instead of a new car every 4 years you are probably looking at every 6 years. not too shabby.

Congrats on the new job.

according2me

75K business miles over 2 years X $.345/mile.

Do the math.

It can pay for itself easily. Like Aggie said, setup a seperate checking or savings account and pay all vehicle expenses from that account and all reimbursements into that account. You'll be amazed at how rapidly that account grows.

It also helps if you enjoy doing your own maintenance.

ateixeira

Keep in mind a few things: it's a deduction, not a credit. Also, you should have qualifying self-employment income to offset in the first place.

Here's the form we use, Schedule C:

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-fill/f1040sc.pdf

-juice

fly2one

I am considering buying a 2002 CRV but I am uncertain how well the AWD works in 6-8 inches of snow. I need to decide between a Subaru or the CRV, I know the Subaru will work great in the snow but I would prefer to get the CRV because it is more comfortable. Can anyone help me out with some snow experiences in a CRV?
Thanks!

kizhe

fly2one: check my post #202 in "Subaru Forester vs.Honda CR-V -- Help!" discussions about my
CR-V "snow test".

ateixeira

Comfort is more important because that'll be a factor every day, so even this Subaru fan would say go with the Honda.

IMO the Subie will have a traction advantage, maybe try out an Outback if the Forester doesn't fit you well. Wait for the 2005 Outback, which will offer a whopping 8.7" of clearance to get over that snow.

Also ask yourself if you want other all-weather features: heated seats, heated mirrors, wiper de-icers, limited-slip differentials, etc. Subaru offers more of those if you live in snow country.

Then forget all that and buy the one that gives you the bigger smile.

-juice

varmint

Fly2one - The CR-V does well in deep snow because of its high clearance and lower gearing. I speak from experience on that. However, once the snow is plowed, the Forester would have the advantage with its permanent AWD system.

andrelaplume

so the Subaru AWD is better than Hondas? I thought Honda's was FWD with an almost almost instantaneous AWD kick in when needed....I'd want the AWD for snow, slush, rain etc....not just freshly fallen snow...can you elaborate?

varmint

"so the Subaru AWD is better than Hondas?"

This begs the question, better at what?

Better at distributing power? Yeah, sure.

Better for fuel economy or packaging? Not so much.

Ultimately, because the Soob system is always sending at least some power to both the front and rear wheels, it has the advantage of being proactive. It might prevent slippage. However, because it is always sending power to the rear, it is always "wasting" some power due to driveline inefficiency.

The CR-V's RT4WD is reactive in nature. It doesn't waste any power driving the rear wheels when the rear wheels are not needed. Instead, the system kicks in only when needed. The transfer of power is very quick, but even a split second could be a split second too late. This is why most experienced CR-Vers recommend driving it like a FWD car.

In the real world, RT4WD is more than enough for safe driving. It's not the ultimate system, but it works well enough for most drivers. If your daily commute included a drive over a frozen lake, I'd recommend a more capable system.

My comments on the snow conditions reflect other differences between the designs. The CR-V has more ground clearance and better approach/departure angles than the Forester. While the Forester has better snow traction, it may get mired down in deep snow, or when traversing the berms left by plow trucks.

Different tools for different conditions.

autosaurus

I just got back from travelling the NJ Tpk last night in unplowed conditions with my new CRV EX auto. The car was perfect. no problems and before I hit the major roads which weren't even plowed the side streets had quite a bit of snow. The car was perfect. This was the exact reason I bought it. I commute 70 miles each day to northern NJ and wanted something that could handle this kind of weather and still get good gas milage.
In this regard the CRV is great

andries

After driving full four wheel, this is our first AWD. After testing it several times in the snow and being really pleased, I was fairly surprised today when my wife got hung up. When I went to help her, I was a little confused, as the back left wheel,and front right wheel were the only ones spinning. Just not used to this as the good old 4 wheel drives when you were hung up, you stuck it in four wheel, and off you went. Once we shoveled from underneath, these two tires would still spin on the ice. All she needed was a little tug and off she went. Is this pattern usual for AWD? Thanks.

ateixeira

Technically, I'd argue Honda employs 4WD part-time, not AWD. That's because there is no center differential. When RT4WD does engage, the axles are in essence locked together, even though the power split varies, they cannot spin freely independent of each other when 4WD is engaged.

So I'd call it part-time, auto-engaging 4WD.

The way I define AWD is that it is full-time, so you'd need a center differential like Audi's Quattro (torsen style) or Subaru's (viscous coupling).

Hard core 4WDers might say you need a low range to have true 4WD, so it depends on which definition you accept.

-juice

ateixeira

OK, now part 2. Differentials. They exist to allow the outside tires to take a longer path than the inside tire in a turn. Without them the axle would be "locked" and you'd have nasty binding in a turn.

When a Jeep owner says he has "lockers", he means he has a locking differential that forces both sides to spin at the same speed. This is not good for dry pavement - your tires will make pretty nasty noises if you do a U-turn. So it's for slippery surfaces only, but it forces both wheels to spin together in a situation like yours.

The solution to that problem is a limited-slip differential. That allows some variation, but only enough for that U-turn. If the wheels spin at wildly different speeds, the other side will eventually grab and turn with the spinning wheel.

Another solution is traction control. By applying the brake to the spinning wheel, power is transferred to the other side.

Honda has yet to emply either for the US. I believe they have VSA in Japan and that would include stability control plus traction control, so really it's ideal. Traction control could manage both axles - so all 4 tires get some power.

As it stands, a FWD CR-V will send power to at least one wheel, sometimes 2. A RT4WD CR-V will send power to at least two wheels, and up to 4.

Compared to the Forester X, which has AWD standard, you'll send power to at least 2, up to 4. The Forester XS/XT does have an LSD on the rear axle, so it sends power to at least 3 wheels and has the traction advantage.

Hope that makes it clear. Check out http://4x4abc.com/ if you want more detailed info, that's a cool site to help you understand how it all works.

-juice

andrelaplume

'drive it like a FWD' ....what do you mean. I hate my wife's RAV but it is awesome in the snow (plowed or not), slush etc...never slipped once. Can I expect the same from the CRV or will I be slipping here and there until it 'catches'...

ateixeira

I believe RAV4 has a center viscous coupling like the MT5 Subarus. Both axles get power all the time.

I think a rear LSD is optional, again like Subaru, so if you have it at least 3 wheels get power, and yeah, it should have the edge.

Tires are, of course, a big factor.

-juice

lowsmoke

Bought my Chianti red CR-V EX in August, and this week have had my first chance to play in the snow. Awesome! Both plowed and unplowed, even with a thin layer of ice on top, the traction was great. In appropriate areas, I even halfway tried to break traction. I'd feel an incipient slipping, and then back on course as if it were on rails. Granted, this isn't the stress test that could be had in Canada. But in this week's snow and ice, the CR-V passed with flying colors.

stevedebi

In my opinion, the CR-V is an AWD vehicle, because it can drive all 4 wheels if conditions warrant. This is similar to someone with a manually engaged 4WD deciding to turn on the 4WD system when the conditions look bad, except that an operator would reqire several seconds, while the RT4WD requires less than a second once front wheel slippage is detected.

ateixeira

At least 2 wheels, and up to 4 wheels, depending upon conditions.

If it's slippery, the CR-V will not, cannot, send power to all 4 wheels. Power will take the path of least resistance and basically 2 wheels will spin while the other 2 get no power.

This is why off roaders get aftermarket differentials. You need two limited-slip or locking diffys to really go "four wheelin'".

-juice

ateixeira

This site explains them better:

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/differential.htm

-juice

dave_cl

This morning, I drove out of my driveway - but I didn't! I had 9+ inches of snow, but also, I have limited visibility. In other words, I couldn't just "gun it" because I needed to see if any other car/truck/snowmobile was coming down the road. Therefore, I had to crawl out of my driveway. But the CR-V stopped. I was able to easily reverse twice, and enlisted my wife to spot for me on the road. A little speed did it very easily, and away I went.
This is a 2002, purchased in Dec., 2001, and has 52000 km (31000 miles) on the clock. I have never been happier with any vehicle, and I've owned more than 30.
I think I will need new tires for next winter, but I'm not prepared to go to separate summer and winter tires, and I'm not prepared to go to larger rims. I'm in Canada. Any advice is appreciated.

stevedebi

"If it's slippery, the CR-V will not, cannot, send power to all 4 wheels. Power will take the path of least resistance and basically 2 wheels will spin while the other 2 get no power."

Hmmm, when the RT4WD kicks in, it doesn't stop the front wheels, it engages the rear wheels - and the transmission is sending power to all 4 wheels. Have you seen some document that states that the front wheels no longer receive power when the RT4WD engages? Or maybe you meant that all 4 wheels won't get traction (as opposed to power)?

However, when the rear wheels are no longer needed, they stop getting power from the transmission, thus saving gas.

tcasboy

stevedebi: AWD is all wheel drive and it is all the time, like the Audi Quattro of the old V8 Ford Explorer. You have power to all wheels (or both axles) all the time. No switching back and forth. In the CRV you only have part time 4 wheel drive, as it is only activated once the front tires start to slip. And you are correct, both axles (or front half shafts) are getting power but without some kind of limited slip device one wheel without traction will just spin and the "use" all the power going to the axle. You need a locking diff between the wheels to insure that power will go to the other wheel on the axle (or half drive shaft, as the case may be)if the other one spins.

stevedebi

No one is saying the CR-V has a full time 4WD. The fact that the rear wheels shut off except when needed is the whole point...

tsdevine

I just bought a 2004 CR-V EX and put a set of Nokian WR All Weather tires in the stock size. They have the severe service emblem (mountain and snowflake logo) like a snow tire, but can be left on year round. They actually carry a pretty decent treadware warranty. I've only put about 500 miles on them, but I've been extremely pleased with them so far. I believe they are probably more common up where you are (I'm in Pennsylvania), since you probably get more snow.

It's worth taking a look at them at least....here's a link to the Nokian web site.

http://www.nokiantires.com/newsite/homeF.cfm

-Tim

sharona1973

Hello all,

Thanks for all the great comments.

The trouble is 1) I've always wanted a CR-V...sob! 2) But I need a car with great gas mileage 3) We don't need an SUV per se, but the other family car is a VW bug and we kinda need a vehicle with a little more cargo room....how else would we be able to haul the christmas tree? Actually, we love to camp and need some cargo space for the tent and misc other stuff.

I've thought about getting a Matrix, Vibe or Focus (wagon type cars) too.

And yes, I'm getting reimbursed for mileage....and I was thinking the other day that if I do exactly what you guys suggested and sock away all the mileage checks and this old '95 Accord holds up for another two years, then I might be able to save up almost enough to pay the entire car off (with some help from other sources).

But I guess I was trying to figure out if it was worth buying a new car every 5-6 years, but I guess that's going to be my fate regardless since the extensive mileage is always going to be there and the fact is, I've always wanted a small SUV or wagon.

aggie1995

Again since you are getting mileage If you drive 25,000 business miles per year. for 3 years.

75,000 Miles x .375 = $28,125
Gas and Maint for 3 years should run you no more than $8000.

A CR-V with 75k and 3 years old will still get you 5/6 on a trade in and 8/9 on a private party sale. Even if you financed the car for 5 years after 3 years you should be at the break even point.

Worst case scenario, after 3 years you sell the car for what you have left on the loan and break even there. Now you take the $20,000 that is in you account from mileage less expenses. Go down and plunk it down on a new CR-V maybe $25k by then . You take home a new CR-V with only a 5k note on it. You start saving again. 3 Years later new Pilot maybe MDX?

And if you keep the car for 150,000 miles which the CR-V should have no problems doing. You'll be way ahead. you should have enough by then to pay cash for new MDX.

Good luck.