Howdy, Stranger!

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





2001 - 2006 Honda CR-Vs

1444445447449450522

Comments

  • Maybe I don't understand something, but it seems to me that legacy's engine bay should be as long as CR-V, if not longer as the engine is a bit bigger in size on Subaru. Also, the does anybody have the data on how different is the reaction time on the new RT4wd compared to the old one?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Subaru's packaging is compact because of its boxer layout. It's an H4, north-south. But unlike BMW's north-south in-line 6, we're only talking about 2 cylinder from each bank adding length, while BMW's has 6.

    That's why the 3 series has limited leg room despite a much longer wheelbase. The Legacy is more space efficient.

    That kind of leg room up front lets them move the front seat a bit forward, both seats actually, and leaves a relatively long cargo area.

    -juice
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    Wheelz - I doubt very much we'll see a vehicle with the 3+3 seating configuration from the FR-V/Edix. Middle seats go to kids, even if they are staggered. US buyers have been trained not to put kids in the front row.

    IMHO, it would be a cute gimmick, but not something that would translate into more sales. I have no problem with gimmicks (like the picnic table and "bed"), but the extra seat and airbag would be an expensive one.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    Masteryoda - I'm not sure why Juice thinks that the Legacy would have a shorter front end. Especially, since it has a boxer 4 (2 cyls wide), while the CR-V has a transversely-mounted inline 4 (1 cyl wide). And the Legacy must also make room for an H6. But, by the same token, I'm not sure why the overall length of the vehicle is in question. That has little to do with the interior length. I mean, part of the CR-V's length comes from having a spare tire on the back.

    In the case of the CR-V, the way the seats fold makes a bigger difference than the length of the vehicle. Notice in the picture below, you are looking at the bottom of the seats. The cargo floor is the floor under the seats, not the back of the seat.

    Folded seats pic

    That's because the seats fold back to cushion, then flip up. And I disagree with Juice about the Legacy being any easier. With the CR-V, it's one motion. You don't even need to remove the headrests and it's as flat a floor as you can get.

    Honestly, your best bet is to take Juice's earlier advice. It's Friday. Take the rest of the afternoon and visit a dealer. Bring the table and see what's up.

    As for the new RT4WD system, nobody knows. That's something I'm working on.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    Since I've mentioned things I'm working on, here's the latest article for the CR-V FAQ.

    varmint "Honda CR-V Owners: FAQ" Oct 21, 2004 7:55pm

    This is i-VTEC as used in the CR-V.
  • lil302000lil302000 Posts: 149
    SUVs or 4x4,AWD station wagons? I could be mistaken, but when I look at this class of cars it becomes a hard sell. To me there are several nice mid size cars that can be had loaded for the price of these vehicles. Don't get me wrong I think they do have buying advantages.
      Things such as higher egress for taller people, Most of them have more head room, and most of them have full size spare tire. As for the drive train, driving in Ohio for most of my life if my FWD car can't get me there than I should stay home no matter what I drive.
      Please don't take this as a shot at those that choose this platform because they are nice and if someone likes the way they look that is as good as any reason to buy. I just kind of feel the makers have snuck one in on us by taking the economical station wagon away and replaced it with higher priced mini utes and mini vans.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    Yep. That's pretty much the story. Though you could look at from other angles as well. These mini-utes are also taking sales away larger truck-frame SUVs and big minivans.

    And the most recent growth in the market has been toward the more car-like crossover SUVs, rather than the big trucks. Vehicles like the new Ford Freestyle, Chrsyler Pacifica, and Cadillac SRX are more like the Subaru wagons than they are SUVs.

    I'm sure if you go back in time far enough, you'll find somebody asking if the auto makers are sneaking one in on us with them new-fangled station wagons. =)
  • theracoontheracoon Posts: 666
    Things such as higher egress for taller people, Most of them have more head room, and most of them have full size spare tire.

    I'm 5'10" and bump my head getting into or out of most "midsized" sedans, or feel like I'm going to bump my head on the ceiling every time I drive over a speed bump. I know this because I travel regularly for work and drive a lot of rental cars. Even most minivans pose a problem for me, especially the Dodge/Chrysler minivans.

    I like to drive sitting in an upright position, perhaps because the first vehicle I truly loved was a '67 VW Van, which I drove for nearly a decade. In any case, I can't imagine buying a sedan anytime in the future.

    As for the drive train, driving in Ohio for most of my life if my FWD car can't get me there than I should stay home no matter what I drive.

    I currently live near Indianapolis, but was born, raised, and then escaped from So California. Even after living in the midwest for more than 13 years, I still feel challenged by ice. The RT4WD of my CR-V allows me to relax while I'm driving, confidant that I won't end up in a ditch.

    JM2C :)
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 40,569
    Once it's at the dealer, it's no longer a future model. Welcome to the, er, normal(?) CR-V forum :-)

    Steve, Host

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • lil302000lil302000 Posts: 149
    agree it does seem the station wagon is making a come back. From small ones to large ones I am seeing more of them in the market. Dodge even has one on steroids. As for the big utes not my cup of tea as well. I have driven them and don't care for the ride, I prefer the ride and comfort of a nice larger sedan.

    I must admit that the mini van we used to have served us well, but not much fun factor in those. So I offset it with the bike. Speaking of fun factor that could be another reason to consider a mini ute such as the CRV.

    I just like the smooth quiet ride of the sedan as opposed to the stiffer louder ride of utes. Keep in mind I am not saying anyone is wrong in choosing the mini ute, as vehicle choice is a personal thing and valid to whoever makes their choice. We are lucky to have the wide selection that we do have.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    Forgot to mention this earlier.

    I stopped by the dealer the other night on the way home from work and checked out the '05s. One of the things that was questioned in the (now retired) 2005 CR-V thread was whether or not the VSA system also included traction control.

    It does. When I have time, I'll do an article on this for the FAQ. Until then, here's the deal.

    VSA will engage the brakes based on whether or not the vehicle is taking the path intended by inputs from the driver. This help to prevent a spin or slide when driving on slippery surfaces.

    Traction control engages the brakes when the ABS sensors detect that one wheel is slipping. Braking a slipping wheel allows it to regain traction, rather than spin uselessly.

    The description of the VSA system in the CR-V sales manual states that it engages the brakes when it detects wheel slippage under 20mph. That's essentially the same description used for traction control in my 2001 Acura TL. This feature will provide supplemental aid to the RT4WD system.

    I wasn't able to find out any more about the upgraded RT4WD system. I'll keep working on that.
  • My opinion, traction control is a lethal weapon. My experience with a Toyota Camry is that had is, it was a deadly weapon for suicide afficinados. Lets say you are making a left turn on a very busy throuofare on a rainy day. You gun the throttle to merge quickly into traffic and your left wheel starts to spin and bam, the traction control kicks in and applies the brake. You panic and give it more gas because you have an 18 wheeler bearing down on you who you have just cut in front of. The engine thinks your wheel is really spinning to fast and shuts down cylinders. The only way to stop this unfortunate chain of events is to let off the gas for a second or two. Now this truck is ready to make you into an accordion. Traction control sucks and now Im bummed I have to buy a vehicle with it.

    My 2 cents
  • theracoontheracoon Posts: 666
    Lets say you are making a left turn on a very busy throuofare on a rainy day. You gun the throttle to merge quickly into traffic and your left wheel starts to spin and bam, the traction control kicks in and applies the brake. You panic and give it more gas because you have an 18 wheeler bearing down on you who you have just cut in front of. [emphasis added]

    So you make an aggressive move in a traffic situation that screams for conservative driving and it's the fault of your vehicle? Hardly. You chose to "cut in front of" that 18 wheeler. If you tried that same move in rear wheel drive vehicle made before the advent of things like ABS, airbags, and traction control you'd probably have spun out and ended up in an even worse situation.

    As with detractors of ABS when it was first released, I'm sure there are people who will think vehicles with traction control systems are more dangerous than the "old, reliable" vehicles without traction control. And they'll be wrong, too.

    JM2C
  • Racoon,

    Since I ditched my Camry, life is fine. I have an Envoy that pulls into traffic just fine. Maybe you are lucky enough to live in North Dakota where there is no congestion and can crawl into traffic when making a left turn. I live in a crowded area and if you don't move sprightly into traffic, then you are destined to go nowhere. Im surprised you didn't offer the suggestion to make 3 right turns instead of making anymore lefts when the street is wet.

    How about offering some constructive advice instead of calling me a detractor, or possessor of buggy whip mentality. Or worse yet, if I dare to say that traction control sucks, then I must be Ted Kozinski, Mr. anti technology.

    I think a system that shuts your engine down, involuntarily, while trying to make a turn is dangerous. The service writer at the Toyota dealer agreed with me and said it was a frequent complaint. I guess they are all Ted Kozinski's as well.

    If this harrowing event happened to you with your family in the car almost being killed, perhaps your smugness wouldn't be so luminous

    Two year
  • lumbarlumbar Posts: 421
    Took a fairly quick test drive of an '05 SE yesterday--new pewter color which is a bit darker than I'd anticipated but nice. The good news IMO is that it is a very nice package and pretty affordable by today's standards. I have not previously driven one and was very impressed with the amount interior/cargo room in a relatively small package. It would be great for our needs except......I thought the seats were (not to mince words) awful. I assume that Honda has determined their market for the vehicle doesn't require a power driver's seat in a 25K+ vehicle (something I'd disagree with), but also found the leather seating to be just rock hard. And I'm coming from a Subaru, which are not exactly known for having -soft- seats.
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 40,569
    I don't think anyone was being smug and I think attempting left turns in heavy traffic is dicey, with or without traction control (I learned the hard way after smashing into a Caddy back in 1980 trying that - now I just take a right and find a light to make a protected turn at).

    Steve, Host

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • I wonder if the traction control in the CRV could be disabled? Sometimes they have a switch that will do just that. I wonder if Varmint noticed such a means when he was at dealer checking them out?

    My first guess would probably be no. Honda probably doesn't want to upset the "fung shway" of the anti-lock, VSA, and traction control features since they are all tied together.

    Steve, I hope you weren't messed up too bad from the accident. Usually people like you who have been through something so traumatic afterwards choose to drive trucks like the hummer H1, not the smaller H2.

    Two year
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 40,569
    We all survived, but the ribs were a mess (I had just picked up some take-away from the local BBQ joint and was in too big a hurry to get home). The beans, alas, were a total loss.

    Steve, Host

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • lumbar said: It would be great for our needs except......I thought the seats were (not to mince words) awful. I assume that Honda has determined their market for the vehicle doesn't require a power driver's seat in a 25K+ vehicle (something I'd disagree with), but also found the leather seating to be just rock hard. And I'm coming from a Subaru, which are not exactly known for having -soft- seats.

    When you say "awful", is it that you find the seats uncomfortable? Or are you like me, and find the seats actually painful?

    Until I learned of the CR-V fires, my number one (and only) complaint concerning our CR-V was the seats.

    I'm not rich - I've never owned a BMW or a Lexus or anything like that. My cars have been more on the inexpensive side, including a '94 Civic my son has now, and a '99 Escort. And even in these less expensive cars, the seats were WAY more comfortable than the seats in our CR-V; certainly, they did not cause pain.

    Most people don't have a problem with the seats, but if you do have a problem, it's a serious problem and a legitimate reason to look elsewhere for your vehicle. And if it was obvious to you during a fairly short test drive (I didn't feel it at all during a long test drive), it's a problem that's not going to go away.
  • Tks for that update...if this is helpful here's what the temple of Honda says, "New Cam-driven Real Time™ 4WD mechanism on all models (replaces hydraulic pump-type system)" What exactly this means is beyond me. Still wondering.
  • theracoontheracoon Posts: 666
    If this harrowing event happened to you with your family in the car almost being killed, perhaps your smugness wouldn't be so luminous

    I wouldn't put my family in the situation as you originally described. Their safety comes first, even if it means taking longer to reach our destination.

    JM2C
  • theracoontheracoon Posts: 666
    Maybe you are lucky enough to live in North Dakota where there is no congestion and can crawl into traffic when making a left turn. I live in a crowded area and if you don't move sprightly into traffic, then you are destined to go nowhere.

    Your profile lists your location as Rochester, NY. I lived in the Rochester, NY area for four years (Greece for a year, then moved to Webster, worked in Irondiquoit). I currently live near Indianapolis, which is more than double the size of Rochester, NY (triple if you count the suburbs). I learned to drive in one of the most over populated areas in the country, Los Angeles County. I know about traffic. And I know not to turn in front of oncoming traffic if there's a possibility I won't be able to get out of their way.

    JM2C
  • kyfdxkyfdx Posts: 28,743
    You have to admit... you haven't read that phrase on Edmunds before.. :-)

    MODERATOR
    Prices Paid, Lease Questions, SUVs

  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Sport/cutes, as I like to call them, are popular because they are affordable and fuel efficient alternatives to truck-based SUVs and do just about everything most owners demand from them better.

    So basically they offer a lot of the advantages, such as a good view point, good cargo room, a roof rack, some towing capacity and AWD traction, without a lot of the common trade-offs: tippy handling, 12 miles per gallon, part-time only 4WD.

    The segment is getting squeezed by more car-like SUVs and by cars that have gotten taller (Camry, Focus, Corolla, 500) and wagons that have also gotten taller (Freestyle, Pacifica, SRX).

    But the segment is still thriving. RAV4 was pretty much first, and sales have not dropped despite the crowded segment today. The segment itself just keeps growing.

    They can't tow 5000 lbs nor can they offer low-range gearing so perhaps they lost potential sales to both of the people that truly need those. lol

    -juice
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    Please consider this an attempt to rationalize the design, not an attack on anyone's opinion. I've got traction control (TC) on my wife's TL, so I have some experience.

    "Lets say you are making a left turn on a very busy throuofare on a rainy day. You gun the throttle to merge quickly into traffic and your left wheel starts to spin and bam, the traction control kicks in and applies the brake."

    In a FWD vehicle without TC, the spinning wheel would have spun and you still would not have moved forward. Most cars have open differentials, meaning that the spinning wheel would have allowed all the engine's power to "leak" out to the wheel that has no traction.

    Had you gunned the engine without TC, you'd have gone nowhere. Might as well put it in park and get out before the semi impacts. With TC, you have a chance of getting moving.

    "You panic and give it more gas because you have an 18 wheeler bearing down on you who you have just cut in front of."

    I find this to be a strange reaction, having driven a TC optioned car for the past three years. When traction control kicks in, you feel a very unusual (sometimes harsh) vibration in the drivetrain. It's just like what you'd feel through the pedal during antilock braking.

    In my experience, people get off the gas when that happens. That would allow the tire to regain traction. Stomping harder on the pedal seems like the last thing a driver would do (IMHO).

    And, yes, I believe you can disable the VSA/TC functions.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    In that circumstance the left front tire would spin, because weight is shifting to the outside, i.e. right side of the vehicle.

    The system would probably brake the left tire only, help transfer power to the right front wheel.

    I imagine cutting engine power would only happen if both wheels were spinning, kinda doubtful in a turn.

    The CR-V (with RT4WD) would have two weapons in its arsenal. The T/C would apply power to the left front wheel, and the AWD could engage to get both rear wheels to start helping.

    I can't imagine what would work more safely to get you across that intersection.

    -juice
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    For many owners (not all), simply adjusting to the style of the seat makes a big difference. The CR-V is designed with a seating position that is more appropriate to much larger vehicles. When you sit in a sedan, you tend to lean back. In a pickup truck or minivan, you sit more upright.

    A lot of people who come from a car to a CR-V have complained about the seating until they figured out how to make the seat worked. Sit upright.

    That isn't going to help with the softness of the cushion, though.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    The documentation on the 2005 CR-V is a bit misleading (IMHO) with respect to the RT4WD. At the least, people are reading to much into it.

    Based on what I've read, the dual pump design has not been replaced. It has been augmented. The new 2005 materials still include mention of replacing the dual pump fluid. The case for the RT4WD unit still looks the same. It still weighs about the same, as well.

    I've been researching mechanical systems to find out more. A press release from Australia describes the new unit with pretty much the same terms as the US information. However, it uses the terms "one-way ball cam" and "pilot clutch". This is more specific than either the US or Canadian press material.

    Both parts are frequently used in transmissions, but I'm still trying to figure out what advantage they provide to the existing RT4WD design.

    Anybody got a good explanation for how these parts work?

    When I find out, I'll post more.
  • theracoon:I lived in the Rochester, NY area for four years (Greece for a year, then moved to Webster, worked in Irondiquoit).

    If you did indeed worked in Irondequoit, how come you didn't learn to spell it correctly, assuming you really did work there? And no, I am not Ted Kozinski, I welcomed air bags and front wheel drive.

    If I pulled onto a busy road, and its wet uphill, sometimes you get a hint of spin, which is normal. With traction control on a Camry, the anti lock would kick in and then the engine would shut down, for a very minor slipping incident. You are exaggerating in assuming that I'm lighting up the tires with clorox at the starting line at a drag race. If you let up on the gas to stop the traction control, that is enough to get the cars behind you to be on your tail very very quickly.

    Frankly, I wasn't fond of a computer chip making a decision to apply the brakes for me. Why can't Honda do like most truck manufacturers do which is, AWD is your traction control if it has the capacity to drive all 4 wheels. It seems redundant, frankly. On the two wheel drive trucks, they then add traction control.

    Two year
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    "Why can't Honda do like most car manufacturers do which is, AWD is your traction control if it has the capacity to drive all 4 wheels."

    Because AWD alone only drives one front wheel and only one back wheel if there is slippage. (Read up on open differentials.) With TC, you can get power to two front wheels, and AWD adds a third wheel in the back.
Sign In or Register to comment.