CR-V vs Escape

jfavour · March 2003

baggs, how did you get that from his post? It sounded to me like he was agreeing with you. Do you have to try so hard to start/perpetuate an argument?

It is indeed a good thing that the Escape costs less to repair, thus likely having lower insurance rates. Many people have long complained about the CR-V's penchant for racking up large accident repair bills, with the prime focus placed on the rear mounted spare. I own an '02 CR-V and I wish Honda would remedy this negative aspect of the CR-V somehow. In the mean time I will hope not to be the victim of an untimely and potentially costly accident.

baggs32 · March 2003

jfavour,
If you've been following along you should understand where I was coming from. To recap, everything discussed in this thread seems to end up being about quality/reliability. I just thought I'd try to get a head start on this one. I never did say that icvci was thinking those things. I said that it sounded like he was thinking them so no, I don't read minds. I just replied to a different interpretation of his post. Another one would be that he agreed with the numbers.

I know it would be hard for a Honda fanatic to do, but adding something like "it's a weak point" or "Honda missed the mark in that area" would lessen the potential for multiple interpretations.

I'm not trying to start an argument, are you? We only discuss the issues around here. Steve and tidester make sure of that. I asked a logical question at the end of that post. Besides, each side thinks the other is crazy so we'd never get anywhere anyway.

jfavour · March 2003

I probably qualify as well as anyone as a Honda fanatic, as I currently own 2. Honda definitely missed the mark on the CR-V's susceptibility to rear end damage in an accident. It is definitely a weak point for the vehicle. How's that?

I know you probably know this, but Honda chose to keep the area under the cargo floor as the wet storage compartment rather than place the spare there. Supposedly a spare would fit there, but I don't remember whether it could be a full sized spare. I use that area for storage and appreciate having the space, but I would probably have preferred a full sized spare there instead. I have read many other posts of owners who love that storage area and wouldn't want to lose it.

Speaking of weaknesses, I wish the rear door was a split hatch like on the Element, rather than the swinging door currently on the V.

My only other complaint would be that my center fold down tray table has broken twice and been replaced (under warranty). Otherwise I am very satisfied with my V.

How about you Escape owners? Do you have any weak points or complaints to admit?

BTW, I am not trying to start an argument, sorry about that!

varmint · March 2003

Does this mean I can start responding to those posts from a parallel dimension?

icvci · March 2003

I'm with you baggs. There is no way to spin that in Honda's favor. That's why I said I cannot argue with that.

However, when I was getting insurance quotes before I decided to purchase, the Matrix, RAV4 (also a poor bumper design), Forester, Outback, and Jetta TDI wagon, were all more to insure by at least $200 a year.

I'm sorry baggs, I've gotta do this. Stop being so damn obtuse! Your insistance that MPG is about the money in your pocket and range of your vehicle is just plain asinine. It's about conservation, fossil fuels are a finite resource. It's about my kid, my kid's kids, and yes, even your kids. Stop being a fool.

tidester · March 2003

... starts today and the weather's too nice to get hung up on personalities so let's all play nice! Thanks.

tidester, host

baggs32 · March 2003

"How about you Escape owners? Do you have any weak points or complaints to admit?"

There's a groove worn in the sidewalk from being around that block so many times.

icvci,
Here's the definition of fool:
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/f/f0233900.html

I don't see how disagreeing with you makes me one, but whatever.

The CR-V's MPG ratings aren't a whole lot better than the Escape's. You're not saving the world by driving one. I'm not even going to respond to that last paragraph any more because I and the other half of America just don't agree. You just have to accept that at some point and move on. Just look at how far we've come in terms of vehicle efficiency by looking back at what used to be offered 20-25 years ago. I think we're safe now. If not, we'll find another way. In fact, we've already started to find that way.

OK, maybe I did go on a little more.

laptev · March 2003

I disagree the CRV costs more to insure than the Escape/Tribute. I will be taking delivery of a CRV in a week and it will cost me $71/year more to insure than my current Corolla. The Tribute I was also looking at was going to be $116 more per year.

I think in general, if someone bangs into the back of your truck, it is going to be their fault - so their insurance company will be taking the hit - not yours.

And if it IS your fault, because of the deductible (I have a $200 deductible), it is going to cost me the same if the repair bill is $210.13 or $1,800. So why care?

Also, I would like to address the kid's kids right to fossil fuels. The sooner we burn through 80% of the world's fossil fuels, the sooner crude will hit the magic $200/barrel mark and the sooner the world will move onto a more efficient, probably cleaner, and certainly less fun to use fuel source. So use up the crude - you will be doing your kid's kids a favor.

odie6l · March 2003

This won't happen for a LONG time. Just look at all the money they put into FORD FIELD for the Detroit Lions. Plus Superbowl XL (40) will be held there. The superbowl alone brings in Millions if not Billions of $$$$.

As for the Insurance thing..
My 2001 Escape, which is classified as a SW (Station Wagon) on my Title, Owner's Card , and Insurance Card is actually CHEEPER to insure than my 1998 Stratus.
Lets compare;
HP;
Escape - 3.0ltr V6 (6cyl) - 201hp (215hp w/ tornado)
Stratus - 2.4ltr Turbo i4 (4cyl) - 205hp (eclipse spyder engine)
Torque;
Escape - 200 lbs-ft (210 lbs-ft w/tornado)
Stratus - 214 lbs-ft
Price;
2001 Escape XLT 4x4 - $25,850 (after extra's added)
1998 Stratus - $28,750 (after extra's added)
Area living in;
2001 Escape - Hershey / Lebanon (Central PA)
1998 Stratus - Chester, PA (SW Philadelphia)

as you can see my Stratus was more for me to insure than the Escape for many reasons. So when you talk about how much it cost to insure a vehicle you have to take into consideration the reasons for the different in cost.

Odie

icon2 · March 2003

All I see so far is denail, rightly or wrongly, on if ford is facing a real possibility of bankruptcy. I am not convinced by the Forbes article. Either way you look at it Ford is a lame horse right now and the probabilities of it staying the course largely depends on whether you believe Ford or the analyst data (and even if the analyst's estimate of the debt was 10 times out, Ford would still be in trouble). And things are not getting better soon as only today Ford set a sharply lowwer car and truck production forecast for the second quarter.

It seems that people are betting on the management making a turn-around for the company. In other word, the bets on the jockey rather than the horse. Nothing wrong with that I guess if it makes you feel comfortable.

The only reassuring thing is knowing that Ford has a large cash reserve to the tune of about $25 billion. So, I am not too worried for the immediate future, but 2 years from now that could be a very different story. What it could then mean for Escape owners I still don't have a clue.

bess · March 2003

Another famous quote from you:
===========
How can you ignore the only real data available on the subject and claim to have an educated opinion on the subject. Your argument boils down to, "In my own little world, where we ignore things like statistics, Fords are good." Fat lot of good that does for the people here on Earth.
=============

I did not put any words in your mouth, you do all of that yourself.

So do you base your judgement of the quality of the CRV soley on what a few publications say? That is hardly educated. I've studied how the publications ask the questions, do the surveys, and I do take the conclusions that they come to into consideration..

Do you also base some your preference on Hondas on your previous experience with them? I've seen you back up your posts with your own personal experiences.

Yet again, another example of where a Honda fanatic claims someone else has an 'uneducated opinion' merely because that opinion is not in agreement with yours..

Do the 'statistics' that you refer to say that the CRV is a better overall vehicle than the Escape? No. What constitues a 'better vehicle' can legitimately vary from person to person. It is this point in which you don't agree with, but that is ok. It doesn't make me or my opinions 'uneducated', it doesn't make my standards 'lower than yours', it doesn't mean 'I'm living in my own little world where I ignore everything else'.

Step down from the Honda pulpit. (sir)

icvci · March 2003

One who is deficient in judgment, sense, or understanding.

Right off of your link. I think it fits perfectly.

Oh, there's this too.

To act in an irresponsible or foolish manner.

That pretty much sums up my meanings.

Consumer Reports average observed fuel economy:

Escape - 17

CR-V - 21

At $1.75 a gallon over 15,000 miles is 164.07 gallons and $287.00. Multiply your wasted 164.07 gallons by 10,000 vehicles a month that's 1, 640,700 then mulltiply that by 12 months and you and your ilk have WASTED 19,688,000 gallons of gasoline. In one year.

Foolish.

It's not about saving $287.00.

Sure, we're on our way to more efficient vehicles, all the more reason to conserve. Who knows how quickly oil fields replenish...or if they do at all. What if, in ten years, we have an engine that runs one thousand miles on one gallon of gas? Who knows? Why not? Why not conserve when you can?

I can see it now, Ford finally comes out with a hybrid car and the last gallon of fuel goes in to an Excursion. Ooops. Sorry! Oh well, it was cheaper to insure than a CR-V and it pulled more, and it had a longer range. Just made sense at the time! Perhaps, if there were more of an I care attitude instead of huh huh I save that in insurance attitude, Ford would try a little harder?

Maybe?

And that ignores the fact that most people who get the Ford V6 would be just as well off with the Honda 4. Get better mileage, and have a cleaner vehicle. And, this is the best part, have an engine that is, for what most people use these vehicles for, a better choice than the Duratech in the Escape!

To act in an irresponsible or foolish manner.

I could not have said it better myself.

bess · March 2003

If your CRV is a 4wd, do you really NEED 4wd. My opinion is that 90% of those people who have 4wd don't really need it, and there is no doubt that same vehicle in 4wd gets less mpg's than 2wd model. So I can assume you chose the 2wd model of the CRV, right?

But wait, there are even more efficient vehicles out there, why are you driving a CRV? Could it be that you and your ilk are wasting millions of gallons a year?

Yet another example where Honda owners stand on the pulpit and say 'I care' and 'you Ford owners dont'.

slugline · March 2003

I was very surprised to see how much more expensive the Ford comes out looking in the TCO calculations on this site. Even when I compared a CR-V EX auto versus an 4-cyl Escape 2WD 5-speed, the CR-V was still cheaper by a few percentage points. There are a lot of assumptions that go into the figures, however, and I do wonder how well maintenance and depreciation can be projected over that span of time.

I would refrain from using high-profile sponsorship deals as a sign of a company's financial health. I can show you a place in Houston that was formerly known as Enron Field. . . .

bess · March 2003

As we've seen on this board, for a comparably equiped CRV and Escape, the purchase price is slightly less for the Escape . Because of the way Ford and Honda package their vehicles, it is difficult to find a set of TCO's between the 2 that match up..
So, I chose the 4wd CRV EX auto tranny with a purchase price of 22,654 and compare with the 4wd Escape XLS auto tranny, with the purchase price of 22,164. (so the starting point of the TCO is only about $500 difference).

As you said, Edmunds ends up calculating that the Escape will cost 33531 after 5 years, and the CRV will only cost 28078. This does sound rather dramatic, so lets look at the numbers and Edmunds definitions..

$2500 of this difference is in projected resale value according to Edmunds. Kelly Blue book and other publications report the difference closer to 2000 rather than 2500.

$1000 of the difference is fuel cost. Can't argue with that. The CRV does get better MPG's on average than the Escape..

BUT Edmunds says the Escape will cost $2400 more to maintain over 5 years than the CRV. This I don't agree with at all.
Look at Edmunds definitions:
Maintenance
This is the estimated expense of two types of maintenance: scheduled and unscheduled. Scheduled maintenance is the performance of factory-recommended items at periodic mileage and/or calendar intervals. Unscheduled maintenance includes wheel alignment and the replacement of items such as the battery, brakes, headlamps, hoses, muffler, taillight/turn signal bulbs, tires and wiper blades/inserts. Estimated tire replacement costs are supplied to Edmunds.com by The Tire Rack, Inc
=============

For 'scheduled maintenance' I'd like to see more definition from Edmunds on how they calculated this cost. Fords come with a scheduled maintenance guide. This guide does not call for the replacement of any parts except for:
oil and filter every 5k miles
replace fuel and air filter, and tranny fluid every 30k miles
change coolant every 45k miles.

My Escape only has 35k miles on it, and I've spent less than $300 on general maintenance on it.

It's hard for me to see that the CRV would also not have similar maintenance.

For the 'unscheduled maintainence', those items are similar for both vehicles, have similar costs, and wear at the same rate. So again this would be about even for both vehicles..

How does Edmunds justify $2400 difference in favor of the CRV?

Note that the above does not represent the cost for repairs outside of warranty or maintenance. This cost as reported seperatly by Edmunds TCO comes out to be about the same. So much for the Escape being 'unreliable'.

The other categories for TCO came out roughly the same, such as financing, insurance, and taxes. Although it has been argued here that the only reasons Escapes outsell the CRV is because they have better financing incentives..

So, while Edmunds calculates the total difference to be around $5500 in favor of the CRV, I see the difference more in the $2000 to $3000 at most (still in favor of the CRV because of fuel costs and some difference in reported depreciation).

scape2 · March 2003

is way off in real world/region markets. The TCO and the used price here at Edmunds also doesn't jive.. You must also make sure you are matching oranges to oranges. Make sure your model/trim levels match up.. Escapes are less expensive option for options also. Once again in todays paper.. CRV LX 19.999, XLT Escape, comes with 4whl ABS, aluminum wheels, V6, tow package for 18,999.
Ford isn't going anywhere. If you had any sense you would know Ford just doesn't own/make auto's.... As far as production being cut.. this is good news in my view. Quality will improve. Besides, with the amount of the cut, companies like Honda can only dream of making the amount of vehicles Ford does worldwide...

baggs32 · March 2003

"One who is deficient in judgment, sense, or understanding.

Right off of your link. I think it fits perfectly."

Again, according to your poor judgment. The other half of the population agrees with me. Sticks and stones...

"Consumer Reports average observed fuel economy:

Escape - 17

CR-V - 21"

WHO CARES ABOUT CR!!!! The real numbers are:
Escape 18/23 = avg. 20.5

CR-V 22/26 = avg. 24

That's a difference of 3.5 MPG. Woohoo! Let's just forego the formalities and give the Nobel Prize to all CR-V owners for saving the earth!

We've had our Escape for almost 15 months now and still have yet to break 10,000 miles. Our Civic is nearly 7 years old and has all of 57,000 miles on it. The low mileage on both vehicles is not a result of gasoline conservation either. We just live in a convenient place where everything is 5-10 minutes away. So you see, you have no right to call anyone anything because you don't know the entire story.

"Multiply your wasted 164.07 gallons by 10,000 vehicles a month that's 1, 640,700 then multiply that by 12 months and you and your ilk have WASTED 19,688,000 gallons of gasoline. In one year."

Who cares?! Something better will come along at some point and your ilk can drive that. I'll stick to driving a big old V8, that gets 2MPG on the highway, while you're saving the world. Besides, I wouldn't call it wasted. Our higher "standards" for engine power require some loss in fuel mileage.

"And that ignores the fact that most people who get the Ford V6 would be just as well off with the Honda 4. Get better mileage, and have a cleaner vehicle. And, this is the best part, have an engine that is, for what most people use these vehicles for, a better choice than the Duratech in the Escape!"

That's OK. You go ahead and think what you want. We fools still have more fun.

carguydc · March 2003

Escape won best small SUV according to Smart Money magazine, March 2003. Here's the link:
http://www.smartmoney.com/autos/newcars/index.cfm?story=march03

icvci · March 2003

Baggs, you said that the insurance money you saved off set the money I saved in gas.

I'm saying it isn't just a money saving benefit for me, it was a planet saving decision.

No one's asking for a prize.

Just open your eyes.

CR's numbers are based upon their driving of the vehicle on real roads, not an EPA estimate I was just using real world data (cause you Fordies always [non-permissible content removed] and moan when we use real world survey's) Something you (I had hoped) would understand. I'm not thinking what I want, I'm knowing what is known.

You'll have more fun? Okay, I'll bite. Which part of the Escape lends itself to being "more fun" than the CR-V? The playful yellow paint?

Who cares?! Something better will come along at some point and your ilk can drive that. I'll stick to driving a big old V8, that gets 2MPG on the highway, while you're saving the world. Besides, I wouldn't call it wasted. Our higher "standards" for engine power require some loss in fuel mileage.

Nice attitude. Talk about poor judgement.

If you don't get it now, all the explaining in the world won't help.

Part of the problem, not the solution.

Pretty sad.

Bess, I live at the bottom of a pretty big hill. It's my wife's vehicle and, with the way Michigan winters can get AWD made sense. I looked at many vehicles and MPG was a main factor.

I didn't get on a pulpit and say I care and you don't, baggs got on this message board and said he didn't care.

icvci · March 2003

What qualifies either as automotive authoriites? Might as well be in MAD Magazine by scape2.

stever · March 2003

And thought she honed in on what a "typical" buyer in NA wants - lots of hp. I got the impression that the horses carried the day for the Escape. That and less plastic I guess.

Steve, Host

varmint · March 2003

I wrote that your standard for reliability was lower than mine. You (and perhaps Baggs) wrote back claiming that I had called all of your standards into question. I wrote one thing, you stretched it to mean a bunch of other things. That's what it means to be "putting words in my mouth".

So do you base your judgement of the quality of the CRV soley on what a few publications say?

Nope. Do you read my posts or just look for sound bites? I've already explained that I use several. I do use publications, personal experience, manufacturer reputations, and word of mouth. The difference is that I value the stats more than the highly unreliable personal experience, reputations, and word of mouth.

baggs32 · March 2003

"CR's numbers are based upon their driving of the vehicle on real roads, not an EPA estimate I was just using real world data"

On our last vacation, 3 extra PSI in each tire yielded 26 MPG. Is that real enough for you? CR tested one new copy. I'm sure all of us Escape owners can vouch for the poor gas mileage the thing gets before properly broken in. I know I can.

"Baggs, you said that the insurance money you saved off set the money I saved in gas.

I'm saying it isn't just a money saving benefit for me, it was a planet saving decision."

If you would have worded it like that at first all would be well. Personal attacks and name calling directed toward other forum members is never going to lead to positive things.

"Nice attitude. Talk about poor judgment.

If you don't get it now, all the explaining in the world won't help.

Part of the problem, not the solution.

Pretty sad."

Lighten up a little. We can still walk if all else fails. Life will go on.

Honda must be making a killing off of people like you.

"Which part of the Escape lends itself to being "more fun" than the CR-V? The playful yellow paint?"

Ours is silver, so I can't vouch for the yellow. Sorry. Actually both are pretty much even when it comes to performance. You can take the Escape in some places that the CR-V won't go (not many though) because of the 4X4 option. I could use it to pull small shrubs, trees, bushes, etc. out of the ground which can be kind of fun sometimes. The way you get pinned to the seat back during a passing maneuver is always entertaining.

icvci · March 2003

It was prefaced with an apology. I am wondering when it will sink in. We have gone around and around with the MPG thing and every time it comes back to money or convenience with you. There was a time not to long ago you said that you didn't care about the MPG cause your bigger tank offset the range.

It was then as in numerous posts before (more than I care to find or account for) that I(we) said to you that the MPG and green rating for the CR-V wasn't about a convenience for us but, a conscience decision to purchase a cleaner vehicle.

How is it Honda would make any more of a killing off of me than Ford would off of you? I'd think the company that makes the car that lasts 20 years makes less on me than Ford would on you.

It's not about having to walk. I'm sure you said that in jest...right? We use petroleum for a heck of a lot more than just vehicles.

Anyway, I'm sorry for calling you a fool. I believe your attitude is foolish and, quite a problem in this wasteful country. I'm not a tree hugger. But, I'm not going to live my life as if my decsions don't effect our planet and our future.

baggs32 · March 2003

"We have gone around and around with the MPG thing and every time it comes back to money or convenience with you."

It's not just me. Leave those references out please. That's my point.

"There was a time not to long ago you said that you didn't care about the MPG cause your bigger tank offset the range."

That's right, and that's all I care about. I want to know how far I can go on a tank of gas. I already showed how many miles my wife and I drive in a year. Isn't that good enough? The average for one vehicle is 12,000 (maybe 15,000?)miles per year in this country. We're only driving about 16,000 combined!

Maybe if we drove more I'd care more. Until then I'm going to keep on driving whatever makes me happy and not worry about how "bad" it is for the future. I'm still using less gas than most of the people in NA. So what's the problem again?

"Anyway, I'm sorry for calling you a fool. I believe your attitude is foolish and, quite a problem in this wasteful country. I'm not a tree hugger. But, I'm not going to live my life as if my decsions don't effect our planet and our future."

There's no need to apologize. I'm not offended. Just realize that I'm not the only one who feels this way. Hell, I even watched, in part, some show about gasoline on the History Channel the other day. It was quite interesting. Part of the show was spent introducing the viewer to new technologies that will greatly reduce, if not eliminate, the demand for gasoline in the future. They were sure to mention that we'll probably be using gasoline for a long time to come, but not forever.

icvci · March 2003

That's pretty contrary to everything I've been taught in my life. Pretty scary too. From as early as I can remember I was told just because someone else was doing something didn't give me a right to do it too. I will never justify my actions as correct because everyone else is doing it. [non-permissible content removed] Germany is a good enough example. Extreme but, it get's the point across.

Maybe if we drove more I'd care more. Until then I'm going to keep on driving whatever makes me happy and not worry about how "bad" it is for the future. I'm still using less gas than most of the people in NA. So what's the problem again?

Congrats. That works out well for you and, as it turns out, for the planet too. (Insert Bronx cheer here.) The "I live closer and use less than most so I'm entitled to waste more" theory doesn't fly with me. There are times it takes me 3 weeks to fill up my recycle bin. Do I throw it in the trash and say "ahhh it's not that much this week, clearly less than most of the subdivision"? No. It's cumulative, start at the beginning and if you cared, it could be you.

Get ready for $3 a gallon.

bess · March 2003

quote from 3611: I didn't get on a pulpit and say I care and you don't ...

quote from 3604: Perhaps, if there were more of an I care attitude instead of huh huh I save that in insurance attitude, Ford would try a little harder?
===========

Sounds pretty close to me.

bess · March 2003

You've indicated that you value the statistics more than 'highly unreliable personal experiences, reputations and word of mouth'.

However, depending on how the statistics are gathered, sampling size, who is sampled, and many other factors, the statistics can also be 'highly unreliable'.

For me, I weigh them differently. I can't dispute the facts of my own experiences, there's nothing 'unreliable' about that.

If you've used a product many times in the past that has met or exceeded all of your expectations and that you were highly satisfed with, would you 'take a chance' on another product or brand just because of a promise that it might be better?

So if 2 products both are very similar in most aspects. I would tend to lean towards the one I have more experience with, if my previous experiences were all postitive.

Don't get me wrong, if I start having problems with my Fords that don't meet expectations, I won't hesitate to look elsewhere.

This is not a case where I am staying 'away' from Honda or saying Honda makes poor products, but more of a case where I prefer a brand that has worked very well for me and my family in the past.

scape2 · March 2003

My last trip over Cascades and into central Oregon.. my Escape gave me a strong 23.8MPG on average! I can't complain one bit. V6 200HP/200ft/lbs of torque.. what a blast to drive.
Around town I still average about 20-21MPG..
carguy.. thanks for the article.

odie6l · March 2003

i hear all this moaning from CR-V and Escape owners about the gas mileage thing... Excluding Scape and Myself who bought Tornado's for our Escape's (and I got 1 for wife's Civic EX too), the Escape and CR-v both have their strong points and weak points... That's why we have whats called a CHOICE to buy what we want to buy. Just go out and get yourself a Tornado and start playing like good little children or go sit in the corner for you time-out.... geesh

Odie

stever · March 2003

I thought the EPA estimates for the '01 V6 were 18 city/24 highway. What good is the swirl gizmo doing?

Steve, Host

icon2 · March 2003

Too right odie61. It's boring to see this on this type of forum. Whenever someone claims to be making a particular car choice based on a 4-5 mpg difference largely because of the good for the planet it just doesn't fit.

Smart money? Sarah Breckenridge? by icvci

Isn't it funny that a magazine like SMART MONEY should put the Escape as the best choice without making any analysis as to running costs, average repair costs, depreciation, etc. Obviously the Escape's qualities was just too overwhelming for the writer of that comparison to worry about such small things. Pity cause if the writer had spent proper time on researching the facts and incorporating her findings then no doubt it would have been a useful article to help answer some of the heated arguments going on here and maybe even help those contemplating Escape vs CRV.

Scape, it's reassuring, u're gettin some pretty reasonable MPG figures. What kind of cruising speed did you do on the highways on that vacation?

BTW, that thing about ford making more than just autos. Isn't that the real problem? Over and out on that.

varmint · March 2003

"However, depending on how the statistics are gathered, sampling size, who is sampled, and many other factors, the statistics can also be 'highly unreliable'."

If they were unreliable, we would see significant variations. That's what "unreliable" means in statistics. But we don't see that. Instead we see the CR-V being consistently rated at the top of its class year after year.

bess · March 2003

In the CR report, what segment of the population is surveyed? CR doesn't necessarily cater to the audience that the Escape does..

Looking at what I've seen published, the CRV did have 1 more red dot, but the Escape also did well in the CR reports and by no means was seen as an unreliable vehicle in their view.

So given how closely the CRV and Escape are rated in CR, the difference could be attributed to the demographic of CR readers vs Ford and CRV owners.

icvci · March 2003

Then why worry about the Tornado?

Whenever someone claims to be making a particular car choice based on a 4-5 mpg difference largely because of the good for the planet it just doesn't fit.

How wouldn't it fit? Granted, it takes more than one person to care but, it has to start somewhere. But, I guess someone who lives in the country that brings us Mexico City ,widely regarded as the most polluted city in the world, wouldn't get it.

icon2 · March 2003

"20-25% gain in MPG no big deal? by icvci "

Didn't say that. Obviously it's a big deal for those choosing the CRV with fuel economy a top priority on their list. It's a big deal for them because it saves them MONEY, not the EARTH.

"Granted, it takes more than one person to care but, it has to start somewhere."

Really, be serious are you expecting us to believe you're starting to make a contribution by buying an SUV and saving 4-5 mpg. C'mon you're only kiddin yourself. I'll say again, it just doesn't fit.

"But, I guess someone who lives in the country that brings us Mexico City ,widely regarded as the most polluted city in the world, wouldn't get it."

So you're saying that in your eyes people who live in Mexico can't understand the importance of
saving the planet and the contribution people and governments can make to protect the earth's resources simply because Mexico city is the most polluted. It's a bit like saying that those who choose to live in the USA can't get the notion of reducing the threat of nuclear proliferation just because the USA developed and has the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons. So ridiculous don't you agree.

So you see we can all pick holes in each other's arguments and go on.. and on.. and on... but it's boring for a discussion board about CRV vs Escape. Move on for goodness sake.

varmint · March 2003

"In the CR report, what segment of the population is surveyed? CR doesn't necessarily cater to the audience that the Escape does."

As long as they gather a statistically significant number of surveys, then they have enough data to publish. They have data for both model years, so they have met that criterion.

"Looking at what I've seen published, the CRV did have 1 more red dot, but the Escape also did well in the CR reports and by no means was seen as an unreliable vehicle in their view."

Yes, compared to last year's data, the Escape has improved. However, it's overall ranking is still more than 30% below the industry average. It has improved, but apparently not by much.

"So given how closely the CRV and Escape are rated in CR, the difference could be attributed to the demographic of CR readers vs Ford and CRV owners."

1. They are not rated very closely. The two are still separated by more than 60% points. 2. I'm not even sure what this talk of demographics means. What demographics? How do they affect the results? Where is your proof?

corynat · March 2003

The whole MPG thing is pretty silly. There is no difference in one person picking the Escape over the CR-V and living with a little less mileage and someone else picking the CR-V over the Civic and living with a little less mileage.

If your primary concern is mileage, you won't drive an SUV anyway.

I "need" and SUV, so I picked one that gets 3 MPG better than yours, so I am concerned more about the environment than you. What a load.

This isn't CR-V vs. Hummer.

varmint · March 2003

Fuel economy isn't the biggest concern right now, but it will become an increasingly important factor. I'd hate to buy a guzzler today and be stuck with it in five years. Ditto with emissions.

I see it as the frosting on the cake. Both vehicles in this debate are reasonably good, compared with the mid-size SUV alternatives, minivans, and large cars. However, when compared within their class, the CR-V is clearly the one with the advantage.

icvci · March 2003

Yes, I do believe I am making a difference. I had choices to make, as most of us do.

I made a small SUV my choice. It got better MPG than wagons with similar room, and has a cleaner burning engine.

I'm not saying people shouldn't be able to drive what they want, I'm saying we all have choices and it behooves us all to choose cleaner more efficient vehicles. Decide what you need and be smart.

I'm not saying my 4-5 mpg by itself makes a difference. I am saying my 4-5 mpg along with the 4-5 mpg from others making earth friendly decisons will make a difference.

I'm not the only person on the planet and I don't live like I am. We all make a difference.

I find it ironic that a guy that hails from the country with the most polluted city in the world, thinks 4-5 mpg can't make a difference.

Nukes? Tell me how I can clean them up. Where can I start? Way, way, way, way, off.

baggs32 · March 2003

"Instead we see the CR-V being consistently rated at the top of its class year after year."

It helps that they keep surveying the same exact people year after year too.

"What demographics? How do they affect the results?"

Demographics are a very important when it comes to statistical analysis. Look at who CR is surveying. Subscribers. Which autos have they consistently rated among the best in the past? Honda's and Toyota's. Who then do you think is returning the majority of the surveys?

However, we don't know who these subscribers are. Are they affluent baby-boomers? Middle-class house-wives? A perfect cross section of all classes in the U.S.?

This is why showing sample sizes for each vehicle would paint a better picture. You could get a pretty good idea of who the responses come from by looking at which vehicles have the higher samples too.

Did you know CR received fewer than 450,000 surveys from the 4.5 million that were sent out?
Considering how many makes/models of autos that are available right now, that doesn't leave room for too many surveys per model.

I know you remember the example of the Grand Am and Mercedes. 200,000 - 300,000 Grand Am's are sold each year vs. about 30,000 - 50,000 of the Mercedes. Yet, CR's survey return for the Grand Am last year was less than the required 100. The Mercedes had a survey return of a few hundred. Who are they surveying to obtain these results? Are they taking the time to fill them out honestly? How do you fill one of these surveys out? Are the categories, i.e. problems, satisfaction, etc., defined or are you free to report anything you want?

If the majority of surveys come from the same people year in and year out, no wonder you see so much consistency at the top.

"Where is your proof?"

There isn't any. CR does not show it. We can only speculate for now. If they ever do release the sample sizes for each model you can then prove to us that the CR-V didn't receive 100 times more surveys than the Escape.

"I see it as the frosting on the cake. Both vehicles in this debate are reasonably good, compared with the mid-size SUV alternatives, minivans, and large cars. However, when compared within their class, the CR-V is clearly the one with the advantage."

No argument there. The CR-V does get slightly better fuel mileage and emits fewer emissions. What those advantages mean to you seems to be where we all have to agree to disagree.

icvci · March 2003

If the Escape Hybrid was avaliable, it'd be in my garage.

baggs32 · March 2003

"If the Escape Hybrid was avaliable, it'd be in my garage."

I think I might have to agree with you on that one. Probably for different reasons, but I still agree with the choice.

varmint · March 2003

"It helps that they keep surveying the same exact people year after year too."

Yes, all the CR-V owners go out and buy a brand new CR-V each model year. That way they can add only positive comments for each and every year. The Ford owners have not caught on, yet. Hence the Ford Escape is rated lower.

"Demographics are a very important when it comes to statistical analysis. Look at who CR is surveying. Subscribers. Which autos have they consistently rated among the best in the past? Honda's and Toyota's. Who then do you think is returning the majority of the surveys?"

As long as they get a statistically significant sample, they have enough. If they do not get a solid sample, they indicate that in their ratings.

"However, we don't know who these subscribers are. Are they affluent baby-boomers? Middle-class house-wives? A perfect cross section of all classes in the U.S.?"

If you don't know that, how are you going to prove that it has an adverse affect on the rankings? You're saying it might be a factor, but you have no idea if it is significant, or just a drop in the bucket. For all we know, this might work in the Escape's favor. This is not proof. It's a shot in the dark.

"Mercedes/Grand Am" - See above remarks on sample size. This has not happened with either the CR-V or Escape. Even if it were true, a small sample has an equal chance of being skewed in a positive light. Once again, you're assuming it works unfairly against the Escape or in favor of the CR-V. It could be the other way around.

"Who are they surveying to obtain these results?" - The owners.

"Are they taking the time to fill them out honestly?" - If there is an error rate on surveys, it would apply across the board... unless you can prove that Ford owners are more apt to lie.

"How do you fill one of these surveys out? Are the categories, i.e. problems, satisfaction, etc., defined or are you free to report anything you want?" - CR asks for significant failures and categorizes them into 8-10 subsets. They define what a "significant failure" means in the directions for the survey. When the data is published, they issue an overall ranking for the vehicle as well as their "red/black dot" markings for each indivdual category.

Baggs, most of your criticisms are possible, but you can't prove that they have a significant effect on the data. Furthermore, most of them can be applied to both the CR-V and the Escape. As mentioned above, maybe the Escape actually benefits from the errors. Maybe it should rated even lower! If the issues you describe were significant factors, the data would be unreliable (inconsistent). We would see frequent and large variations. That simply hasn't been the case.

icvci · March 2003

I think Honda owners lie about the reliablity of their vehicles while Ford owners are honest. That's why Honda always looks good in large owner survey's and Ford generally does worse.

I like to make Honda look better. It makes me feel good.

varmint · March 2003

I think CR has more subscribers in Florida. We all know how well they can fill out ballots.

bess · March 2003

Comparing the 2002 CRV to the 2002 Escape, I made a mistake. the CRV and the Escape had the SAME NUMBER of 'red dots' reliability history overview. 11 each out of 14 possible.
This tell me they are rated very closely. Note that the Sante Fe had 14 out of 14.. (better than both the Escape and CRV, dang).

stever · March 2003

For Ford fans:

A Model T to Ford Crown Victoria History

14 out of 14 for the Santa Fe eh? That's pretty interesting....

Steve, Host

baggs32 · March 2003

"As long as they get a statistically significant sample, they have enough. If they do not get a solid sample, they indicate that in their ratings."

They have to make it fair for everyone involved though. CR does not do that. One vehicle could have 100 returns and it's competitor could have 10,000.

"Baggs, most of your criticisms are possible, but you can't prove that they have a significant effect on the data."

I know. I already said that. But CR's data is not proof of anything for the same reasons. They have not proven to us that their data is reliable. Showing the numbers and saying "here is your proof" does not mean they are right. We don't know much about where those numbers are coming from.

"If there is an error rate on surveys, it would apply across the board... unless you can prove that Ford owners are more apt to lie."

How do you figure? If an affluent Porsche owner has his/her secretary fill the survey out, and knowing that some vehicles do not have the luxury of a large sample size, results could be thrown off significantly by that one survey.

""Mercedes/Grand Am" - See above remarks on sample size. This has not happened with either the CR-V or Escape."

Prove it. All we know is that each one received 100 or more surveys.

"Yes, all the CR-V owners go out and buy a brand new CR-V each model year. That way they can add only positive comments for each and every year. The Ford owners have not caught on, yet. Hence the Ford Escape is rated lower."

Aren't these rankings based on surveys from people who have owned the vehicles for 5 years or less? How is it that they don't send them to the same people every year. It seems you are implying that only new owners receive the surveys. I'm under the impression that all their subscribers are asked to fill out a survey for each vehicle they own if it is not more than 5 years old. Am I way off?

C'mon varmint. I thought you of all people would understand what I'm getting at. CR is not a fact book. It's a guide.

"Comparing the 2002 CRV to the 2002 Escape, I made a mistake. the CRV and the Escape had the SAME NUMBER of 'red dots' reliability history overview. 11 each out of 14 possible.
This tell me they are rated very closely."

So why the big gap in their numbers then? Are they just guessing?

icvci · March 2003

Give him CR if he wants to take out CR. How about J.D. Power?

I was just noticing, the Escape has a 16 gallon gas tank and the CR-V has a 15.3 gallon tank.

Range - CRV 336/397 Escape 288/368

Looks like you could have saved the planet and had better range!

CR-V vs Escape

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles