Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
The price of an XLT 4WD in 2002 when we bought our original Escape was much lower than what it is now, and with no rebates at all. Not even special financing.
As for the ability to buy one at the prices scape is quoting, I too am skeptical. It's not that I don't believe the dealer is printing those prices in their ad, but I doubt that they will actually sell you anything at that price. Sounds like a bait and switch proposition to me.
Either that or Escapes are not very popular in the Pacific Northwest. I know they are extremely popular in my area and pretty much "sell themselves" making advertisements and unbelievable deals on them scarce.
As far as Escapes/Tribs not selling well here, there are plenty of them on the road. I would say easily a 3 to 1 ratio of Escapes to CRV's...
As I was going throught the paper looking at prices. I also noticed Honda's car/van/SUV line is just plain more expensive across the board. In comparing for example a Corolla to a Civic same trim level advertisment puts the Corolla at about $1,200 less than the Civic!@ This just enforces my feelings of Honda products as over priced and over rated. In other chat rooms across the internet people are starting to catch on to this very same feeling. What will Honda have when thier reputation of reliability fades away?
For example, I went into a Ford dealer late last year in response to an ad that told me I could buy an '03 Focus SVT 5-door with all the fixin's for some insane price. As it was I didn't qualify for the recent college grad rebate, specific dealer loyalty bonus cash, or military personnel rebate. AND because I am an X-Plan customer, and don't have to put money down, I wasn't going to put the $2000 down that was factored into the ad price. Therefore my price was a good $3000-$4000 more than what was in the ad.
Needless to say, I didn't buy one.
we got our '04 limited for less than x-plan(before rebate). we did pay a dealer processing fee, which you shouldn't have to pay with x-plan.
Taking into account the holdback, the CR-V EX w/AT has a cost of about $20680. Obviously if they sold every one at $20500 the dealership wouldn't stay in business very long. But they do sell them at this price.
Honda's are not gold. They can be bought at or below invoice.
We got our Limited for the X-Plan price minus the rebate with special financing thanks to my wife's credit union. In my experience the dealers are always willing to "meet or beat" credit union rates.
I don't know how Honda's dealer cash works exactly but they could be using un-used cash from another model, which is available after ripping some uninformed customer off, to sell the CR-V's for less.
How else can you justify a salesman throwing his/her commission out the window and giving the business a loss? The money has to be there somewhere. Honda just does a good job of hiding it.
Kind of like their TSB lists.
Are you referring to Honda or Honda dealers. I don't think they are one in the same much like how Ford dealers are NOT owned and/or operated by FMC.
I'm quite sure the Honda business model does not include losses on sales.
I've read a couple of articles stating the same thing as that one. It's no big secret that rebates are hurting the value of domestic vehicles. The quality is still there and that's what they need to push. In fact, one of the other articles stated that the big 2.5 will be airing commercials this fall for that exact purpose so stay tuned.
Here's one of them and I can't find the other.
http://www.aemag.com/current_articles/feature_aug04_01.html
I know plenty of people with Big Three vehicles who have had no problems.
The vast majority of the car buying public sees import brands as having a higher perceived value than those from the Big Three. Due to rebates, incentives, etc. Which we have been discussing, not quality.
You disagree, which is fine. But you are in the minority, at least according to this article.
Escape Pros:
A. We liked the looks better
B. Doors closed w/ that reassuring 'clunk'; nice and solid
C. We liked the dashboard layout better
Escape Cons:
A. We thought the mechanism to fold the back seats down was left wanting; my wife especially did not like it. Having to remove the headrests and stow them looks like a pain in the [non-permissible content removed].
B. Transmission. It was slow, or cludgy. The salesman said it took between 1k and 2k miles to 'get to know the driver'. I think that stinks as both my wife and I will be driving it (so how's it going to learn?) and who has 1-2k miles to wait for the thing to perform as expected?
C. Fit and finish, from cursory inspection, did not seem particulary tight; especially the steering wheel controls.
CRV Pros:
A. Cockpit seemed higher to us
B. Transmission changed gears eagerly and seemed very responsive
C. With the A/C on and 3 people in both vehicles, I really couldn't discern much difference between the two engines (Honda 4 banger and Ford Duratec V6). ((don't start flaming about the extra 40 HP and 36 ft/lbs of torque. I know all about it, I'm just relaying what I felt)) As much the Ford engine was the bigger selling point initially, I just couldn't 'feel' the big deal.
D. Sunroof standard on the EX, as is side airbags.
CRV Cons:
A. Less truck looking
B. Didn't like the swing to the side tailgate
C. Wish the tires were bigger (I hear its a rumored upgrade on the 05's)
As it stands right now, in a few months we're probably going to go for the 'V'. As much as I regret not going American, at least they finally made a vehicle that got me into an American showroom. So that's progress; maybe next time?
Jopopsy
"No, its not my real name"
Technically, it's the rims that we expect to see enlarged. The tires will probably stay the same overall size.
just from my experience, the escape doors, feel pretty thin to me, compared to the explorer.
it takes awhile for ford engines to break in, many times 8-10k, at least the last couple i have had. the escape only has 5k on it, so i don't know if it will do the same. tranny is pretty clunky to start, but it has seemed to smooth out.
however, i don't drive it on a daily basis.
the crv needs to rev to get into the power zone, so unless they start making more torque, it won't change. ford 'mod' engines have to rev more to make the same torque as those old gm engines.
these just my observations.
"A. We thought the mechanism to fold the back seats down was left wanting; my wife especially did not like it. Having to remove the headrests and stow them looks like a pain in the [non-permissible content removed]."
I think it is very nice feature; you get nice and flat cargo space. You can even use it for sleeping once you lay down an airbed. I don't think that pulling out headrests is harder than folding the seats down.
"B. Transmission. It was slow, or cludgy. The salesman said it took between 1k and 2k miles to 'get to know the driver'. I think that stinks as both my wife and I will be driving it (so how's it going to learn?) and who has 1-2k miles to wait for the thing to perform as expected?"
Strange, the one I drove was very responsive, even with 3 people and AC on. I was feeling the seat on my back when I pushed the gas pedal. Modern car transmissions have adaptive logic. CRV has it too. Looks like, you'll have issue no matter what you buy.
"C. Fit and finish, from cursory inspection, did not seem particulary tight; especially the steering wheel controls."
Like I said, you should stick with CRV. Escape/Trib is not for you. I couldn't see any problem with fit and finish. It looked-felt very firm, the one I drove.
For the CRV part of your posting, I can't make that much comment on.
I didn't analyze that car for long time, I felt, it was a weak vehicle and cut my test drive short and left the dealer.
One last word, you will see the I4 - V6 difference
when you are merging to highway or passing someone on expressway, or driving on hilly roads around mountains or trying to carry ten bags of top soil from Home Depot to your home.
If CRV is going to be your commute car than I4 is OK. If you are planning to have cargo, passengers then you should consider V6 of any make.
Good luck with your CRV though.
when you are merging to highway or passing someone on expressway, or driving on hilly roads around mountains or trying to carry ten bags of top soil from Home Depot to your home.
If CRV is going to be your commute car than I4 is OK. If you are planning to have cargo, passengers then you should consider V6 of any make."
I have loaded my CR-V to the gills and driven to Yosemite. It never lacked power, and I got 26 MPG on the road. You do have to kick the engine down to pass, but that's the way the vehicle is designed.
CRV owners love to compare their vehicles with almost everything...:-)
I too am sorry your not going to support the American worker. When Americans wake up and realize we are all connected in this economy, it will be too late. I personally will not send anymore of my money overseas. I will demand U.S. made vehicles and products from now on and vote with my hard earned dollar!
I hope that Escape has a nice dark tint on the privacy glass because I bet all your clothes are made overseas, along with your Nikes
What is an American car?
Steve, Host
Perhaps an explanation of what we want our next vehicle to do is in order. We are preparing for life w/ baby. What we wanted was a vehicle that could get around in most weather conditions, be safe for baby, and be able to make the grocery store runs and Home Depot runs. We won't be towing anything. We don't have 4 or 5 adult sized/weighted people to sit in it.
Maybe it was our Ford sales guy too; he was a real [non-permissible content removed]. Greased back hair, knew next to nothing about the vehicle, and took a cell phone call while we were test driving and proceeded to gab for 5 minutes. What a dumba$$.
Jopopsy
I think that's only true if you slide the rear seats forward. Otherwise they are about equal.
If you have a car seat or a passenger in the back you'll probably want to keep the rear seats all the way back anyway which will negate the extra cargo space.
I'm pretty sure these two are about equal on cargo space with the seats folded flat too. That was one of my concerns. I've had several 10' boards in our Escape and I've heard of CR-V owners doing the same. If you remove the bottom rear seat cushion you can make a completely flat bet that allows the lumber to extend from the hatch to the front passenger footwell. I believe you have to remove the entire rear seat to do that in the CR-V.
That's something I do more often than I thought I would and the 60 seconds it takes to configure the seats is well worth it. It's much easier than strapping stuff to the roof which I've done before too.
Scape2:
Look, I appreciate you opinions, but rest assured I am not a liar, and am not exaggerating. And I am not talking math, I am talking experience. I happen to own a CR-V and have extensive experience with it.
I loaded the CR-V until I had to use the side mirrors to see behind me, ran all the way up to Yosemite (lots of up and down, plus two-lane passing), and I did not notice any problems with acceleration and handling. And fuel economy was excellent.
As stated before, you have to know the CR-V and the engine when passing at highway speeds. Plus it is important to know that Honda engineering has a certain feel to it, and responds to driving inputs that are in accord (pardon the pun) with the vehicle design.
"I too am sorry your not going to support the American worker. When Americans wake up and realize we are all connected in this economy, it will be too late. I personally will not send anymore of my money overseas. I will demand U.S. made vehicles and products from now on and vote with my hard earned dollar!
Of course, you do realize that the vast majority of American Hondas are made in ... yup ... America. The CR-V is an exception, I suppoe because there isn't a Honda plant here that could easily make it, and the CR-V is a "world" car with lots of foreign sales.
Nope, here are the specs from the Ford website:
Escape rear cargo: 66.3 Cu. Ft.(rear seats down) 29 (seats up)
CRV rear cargo: 72 Cu. Ft. (rear seats down) 33.5 (seats up)
Interestingly, the Ford "comparison chart" doesn't mention the seat up figure. The cargo value is with the seats fully to the rear - this is obvious if you check the rear legroom:
Escape rear legroom: 35.6 inches
CRV rear legroom: 39.4
Thus, unless one is willing to grant the CR-V a maximum rear seat room of 47.4 inches, the figures are with the seat to the rear. The rear legroom and the rear seating arrangements were a large factor in my decision for CR-V. I have about 40 cubic feet behind the rear seats when I move them fully forward, and even if I only move them 3 inches, that provides about 36 cubic feet, with the same legroom as the Escape. Plus the seats recline. The rear legroom is actually larger than an Explorer. However, I think the Escape has more legroom up front. I don't have problems (at 6 foot tall), but some people think it is too cramped for the driver.
However, I don't off-road, in which area the Ford has the advantage (though the advantage is somewhat less with 2005, since they removed the locking low range from the 4WD). And I have no reason to tow anything, again an area in which the Escape V6 (3000 lbs) is more suited than the CR-V (1500 lbs).
The two vehicles have different strengths and weaknesses; the best thing is to drive it and see which one is for you personally.
"100lbs doesn't delete a 40HP and 40ft/lb advantage."
No, it only deletes about 25%, not the entire 40 hp difference. Most sport car tuners will tell you that reducing 6-8 lbs will have the same impact as adding 1 horsepower. (Funny, I was just writing about this in another thread.) So a difference of 100 lbs between these vehicles would mean a 12-16 horsepower deduction from the Escape. Making the difference (in feeling) more like 24-28 hp, not the whole 40.
If we were to subtract an average 15% for drive train losses in both vehicles, the difference is reduced further to about 20-23 horsepower.
The CR-V is geared quite a bit lower than the Escape, making it easier to get to the strongest portion of the power curve (relative to the engine). Which makes it easier to see why drivers might not notice a significant difference between the V6 and I4 in these vehicles.
The engines don't live in a vacuum, after all.
Most of the CR-V's extra room comes in the form of height. If you're stacking baby/kid gear back there, as jopopsy is planning on doing, you'd be wise not to stack too high otherwise you'll have things sticking out of your head if you happen to be in an accident.
For all intents and purposes, both hold the same amount of gear. Unfortunately there isn't a measure of cargo capacity for the area between the two sides and from the load floor to the top of the seat backs. That's the most used space, for me anyway, and the other configurations are just conveniences.
Before you cry foul again and start quoting websites, I'm not saying the CR-V doesn't have more room, leg or cargo, because it does. However, the difference is small and you also have to take into account that the Escape will hold more weight back there as well as on the roof thus increasing what you can carry overall. I am putting a soft rooftop carrier on our Escape for our vacation next week (Everyone please pray that Frances doesn't turn North toward VA ) and plan to load it as well as the rear up as far as they'll safely go. I'll also inflate the tires a little and fully expect to get about 24 mpg just as we did on our last trip.
I always thought MT's (at least I think it was them) beer case test was a good measure of what a cargo bay can hold. Putting squared objects into a rounded space usually shows how much space is actually usable and how much is wasted. Sure you can stuff small soft items in the "wasted" pockets but the big square area in the middle is really the only usable part to me.
Point taken, though of course you do realize that the CR-V is wider and longer than the Escape? And that the Escape is taller, not the CR-V? Would provide numbers but don't want to reference external websites ;-).
Oh, what the heck here it is from the Ford site:
Escape: L:174 w:70.1 h:69.7
CR-V: L:178.6 w:70.2 h:66.0
But I have to agree, those manufacturors do go for the height in order to increase cargo room...
And before we go there, the CR-V is .1 inches higher off the ground, so that wouldn't account for any differences.
Actually, I've always been impressed with the interior room in the CR-V. Some of it probably has to do with the spare tire being carried on the door instead of under the car or inside the car.
None of this is to knock the Escape - it is a good vehicle for those that need it's specific advantages. Just comparisons...
Why do you need an SUV then? why not a mini-van?
Maybe you haven't driven an Escape loaded down? There is a differnce. I took a trip over the Cascade range last year. Escape loaded down. I passed a new CRV going up a 7 percent grade... The V6 is more powerful and makes a difference. As far as MPG.. your advantage is about 2MPG.. I am reading around on the net that some CRV owners are not getting as great MPG as is stated also..
15percent of 160 is a 24HP loss in the CRV not 20 or 23 alos...
Your 160HP cRV drops to 136HP due to "power train loss"...
Your post sounds good... It just take one person, like me... to pick it apart... try again...
Anyhoo... these 2 vehicles are very close in dimensions. So close people can't notice... Just like some CRV owners claim they can't notice the diffence between the 4cyl and V6... ;-) touche!...
Oh pullease, get off your soapbox. You should know there is no such thing as an American made car anymore. I prefer to spend my money that keeps an American worker employed. I don't give a rats [non-permissible content removed] about the parent corp. Granted, the CRV is not made here, but most Hondas and Toyotas are.
I do but I recall us discussing this a long time ago, in this thread, and it turned out that the CR-V's cargo bay is taller. The height of the vehicle from ground to top of roof has nothing to do with cargo capacity. It's what's on the inside that counts.
Actually, I've always been impressed with the interior room in the CR-V. Some of it probably has to do with the spare tire being carried on the door instead of under the car or inside the car.
I think that has a lot to do with it. Since the Escape's tire was inside (pre '05 models only) it seemed to take off some height in the cargo hold so they didn't have to extend the well too far below the rest of the floor. Now the tire is on the outside but they still couldn't drop the floor because the space where the tire once was is now reserved for the hybrid's battery pack.
The CR-V doesn't have this problem because the tire is on the back therefore allowing for the extra height.
Again, I'm not positive that the CR-V has extra height back there but it was a pretty strong recollection.
So you are saying that the CR-V has 47 inches of legroom when the seat is pushed back? In any case, the value is with the seats back - the CR-V thread went through this a while back. I actually asked the question myself.
Of course, the issue doesn't even come up with the Escape, which lacks the capability to move the seats forward and backwards...
And count me in as one of those who can't tell the difference between a 4 cyl CR-V and a 6 cyl Escape. I should note that the Escape I rented was a 2002 model, not a newer one; maybe they are different. The two powertrains have very different characteristics however, and if you drive a CR-V like an Escape, it won't accelerate as well. If you drive it like a Honda, it does fine. Similarly, if you drive an Escape like a CR-V, well, I'm not sure what would happen in the long term, though the MPG would suffer.
tidester, host
Hmmm, if the two vehicles are if a similar size in height, that means that Honda managed to squeeze more interior room for the same exterior space. And since they are of a similar size in width, you are saying that while accomplishing this Honda managed to be less efficient in packaging?
However, the sliding seats do come into account here, and I suspect that the extra legroom intrudes into that 3" space in the cargo area. But I don't see how the CR-V could be less wide...
Of course, as stated before, if you want that extra floor space, you can move the seats forward in the CR-V, either to the same rear legroom as the Escape, or to even less legroom. I wouldn't recommend the latter for a long drive unless you have small kids.
I forgot to mention that the CR-V has a wheel well under the cargo area; it is built for a limited use spare (overseas models don't have the spare tire on the rear door - I assume they have the limited use spare under the cargo floor). The CR-V community calls it the "ice chest" because it is water proof. Anyway it is an additional storage area back there.
Right.
I think the CR-V is about 4 inches longer too. But from what I understand the spare is included in that measurement which probably makes it more like two inches over the Escape's rear bumper.
And since they are of a similar size in width, you are saying that while accomplishing this Honda managed to be less efficient in packaging?
I'm not following you there. When did I say that?
Of course, as stated before, if you want that extra floor space, you can move the seats forward in the CR-V, either to the same rear legroom as the Escape, or to even less legroom. I wouldn't recommend the latter for a long drive unless you have small kids.
That's always been one of my arguments about the usefulness of the sliding rear seats found in some small utes. At least for me, the only time I'm filling the cargo bay is when I'm carrying passengers AND their gear. If I want them to be comfortable on a long trip I can't slide the seat forward, and if I can't slide the seat forward I might not be able to fit all their stuff.
Having a small child right now would probably make the sliding seat beneficial. After a year though it's probably going to stay put.
I forgot to mention that the CR-V has a wheel well under the cargo area; it is built for a limited use spare
I knew it was there but didn't realize it was for a spare across the pond. Why two spares?
Anyway, the well in the Escape held a spare and all it's accessories. It is/was a pretty big well for a pretty big spare. I would imagine Ford would have lowered the load floor and decreased the size of the well, thus increasing cargo space, if the spare had been on the back too.
BTW, thanks for missing the point.
I wasn't making aceleration claims. I was directing someone to the reason why this thread started and who started it. Given that you are the one with the first post, I'd think you would remember doing it.
Scape, your attempts at math crack me up.
30 is 75% of 40.
10 is 25% of 40.
You wrote that 100 lbs does not compensate for the 40 hp difference. You're right (for a change).
However, that 100lbs does make up for "about 25%" of that 40 hp difference. Adding 100 lbs to a vehicle has an effect similar to reducing 12-16 horsepower. (Which is actualy more like 30-40%, not the 25% I approximated.)
"15percent of 160 is a 24HP loss in the CRV not 20 or 23 alos..."
You're not following the point of the post. The 20-23 number represents the difference between the vehicles after the weight disadvantage and drivetrain efficiency have both been accounted for. In other words, 158 vs 136 hp, or a difference of "about 20-23" horesepower.
My math skills are fine. All you've done is bring your reading skills into question.
All speculative numbers, all speculative conclusions...
Varmint
"Adding 100 lbs to a vehicle has an effect similar to reducing 12-16 horsepower"
How did you come up with this statement? I don't think that you make such generalization...
HP reduction starts @ different weight on every make and model.
These numbers changes based on vehicle, outside temp, road conditions, wind and many other things.
There is every reason to buy whatever product is best according to one's needs. One would be cheating oneself out of better value to buy inferior products for crude nationalistic reasons.
That said, 6-8 lbs per horsepower is a reasonable range. And, since we're talking about HP at the flywheel as measured by the manufacturer, variables like road condition and wind don't matter.
Agree - you should have stopped there! Let's get back to discussing the vehicles and leave the political/economic discussions for another forum.
tidester, host