CR-V vs Escape

midwesttrader · November 2005

After reading your previous posts, you're telling us that because the maintenance costs you and one buddy have experienced with the Escape do not match the Edmunds numbers that TCO is "wacked." I have a feeling that the Edmunds numbers might be based on the experiences of more than two people.

Out of the seven cost categories used, the Escape takes the biggest beating on depreciation and fuel. The maintenance and repair costs for the two are less than $1K apart total.

BTW - they use new car TMV in the depreciation calculation, so unless you think TMV is "wacked" too the purchase cost should not be an issue.

bobw3 · November 2005

Probably true because of depreciation after 5 years, but once a car gets over 150,000 miles, then the selling prices for any vehicle starts to merge, so this type of calculation is really only good for those who keep the miles low and buy new cars every few years.

ajag · November 2005

What replacement tires does anyone recommend for the CR-V when the Bridgestones wear out?

arizonajoe · November 2005

Hi all,

On the CR-V tires issue - it's not the 16" diameter that is the problem. The tires look too narrow for such an application. The Escape also has 16" inches, but they are chunkier. I would bet the Escape/Tribute handle better, have more grip, etc. Just looking at the current gen CR-V makes me nervous, because you've got a big body on top of little, narrow tires. It looks out of proportion. I don't know, maybe my perception of it is off.

The bigger issue is the Bridgestone H/T tires. I'm relying on TireRack.com for all my info here. I don't want junk tires. By the way, are you aware that Kia puts Michelin Cross-Terrains OEM on the Sorento? Blew me away. That's what Acura puts on the MDX - it's a primo tire.

Someone mentioned that they knew someone who had Geolandars on their CR-V. I doubt it's the current gen CR-V. In that tire size, no Geolandar model appears to be available (and its the Geolandar HTS that's the good one.)

Yes, the Xterra is going to burn more gas. Granted.

The Kia/Hyundai twins have less power, and only 4-speed autos. But their feature content is amazing. They really make the Escape look spartan. Their smaller size is also a plus for me - I my small SUVs to be small.

I agree with varmint's long-standing position that the CR-V and Escape are roughly equal in real world acceleration. I drove the Escape, and the V6 made a lot of noise without moving the vehicle very swiftly at all.

I have no idea if the Escape has a future, and an all-new CR-V is apparently coming for 2007. It's about time. If they put some decent tires on it, put the shifter on the floor, extract 175+ HP from the 2.4L, and NOT add any more size or weight, it will be hard to resist. Homelink would be nice too - and Bluetooth.

arizonajoe · November 2005

To answer ajag's question, the best options I see are the Michelin Synchrones and the Pirelli Scorpion STs. And even these have mixed reviews (and cost a lot of money). The universally acclaimed tires are not available in this size.

These are all in the Light Truck --> Highway All-Season category. (As are the stock H/T tires).

condo1 · November 2005

I checked with Honda N. America. Their official position is that the spare tire bracket on a cr-v is only rated to hold the weight of a spare tire.

tidester · November 2005

I have a feeling that the Edmunds numbers might be based on the experiences of more than two people.

Indeed!

tidester, host

drive62 · November 2005

It was mentioned that the Escape has 15" tires standard on the base model.

If Honda listens to you and puts all those bells and whistles on their entry level SUV, we'll pay what exactly?? That's what the Acura version is for.

And when I see your comment about putting the shifter on the floor it tells me this vehicle is not for you.

blueiedgod · November 2005

Just looking at the current gen CR-V makes me nervous, because you've got a big body on top of little, narrow tires. It looks out of proportion. I don't know, maybe my perception of it is off.

Beauty is only skin deep. The stability of the vehicle is not determined by the fatness of the tire alone. The transverse spacing of the tires determines lateral stability (resistance to turn over). CR-V is plenty plenty wide for its height. Plus the the wheels are cambered out to give it more lateral stability. The camber increases with the load, such is a Honda suspension.

Someone mentioned that they knew someone who had Geolandars on their CR-V. I doubt it's the current gen CR-V. In that tire size, no Geolandar model appears to be available (and its the Geolandar HTS that's the good one.)

I believe they went with wider 215 mm tire as opposed to 205 stock tire.

By the way, narrow tires are MUCH MUCH better for snow and possibly rain. Wider tires spread the weight too much and don't allow for comeple evacuation through the channels. Narrower tire puts more pressure per square inch, letting the tire dig into the snow and reach the pavement underneath. Bigger is not necessarily better.

The 2007 CR-V is rumored to produce 200 hp out of the same 2.4 liter block, just like Acura TSX does now. A real TRUCK guy would be more interested in the 260 ft. lbs of torque from the 2.2 cTDI possibly making its way to our shores in 2008.

By the way, the SHIFTER is already ON THE FLOOR, in the CR-V with a real man's transmission, e.g. Manual.

blueiedgod · November 2005

Homelink would be nice too - and Bluetooth.

Home link from Acura TL (gray) and Oddysey (beige) is a perfect fit for the CR-V :-)

Bluetooth is good if you have a blue tooth phone, I guess. Maybe it will trickle down from Acura to CR-V. What other Cute-UTES have blue tooth and homelink?

arizonajoe · November 2005

I definitely think Homelink could trickle down. The Trib and Escape have accessory Homelink mirrors. The Kia Sorento has it too.

Bluetooth is still up in the luxury segment, but I hope it trickles down too - and yes, the sole purpose is for phone integration (hands-free).

iPod integration is another techno-geek must-have. It's probably going to be a common feature very soon.

I hope a 200 HP version of the CR-V's 2.4L doesn't end up requiring premium fuel...

thegraduate · November 2005

The tires look too narrow for such an application. The Escape also has 16" inches, but they are chunkier. I would bet the Escape/Tribute handle better, have more grip, etc. Just looking at the current gen CR-V makes me nervous, because you've got a big body on top of little, narrow tires. It looks out of proportion. I don't know, maybe my perception of it is off.

I would have to say your perception is somewhat off. While you are correct about the wider tires offering more grip, this only holds true in dry conditions, where a 195mm and up width tire is more than capapble of allowing proper handling for all but the raciest drivers. The wider tires have a downside when foul weather arises. They produce an effect called hydroplaning, which is where the tires sort-of "ski" on top of the water, eliminating any traction or grip when trying to stop or maneuver the car at a decent rate of speed. The tires shouldn't make you nervous...look at Hondas of yore...my 1996 Accord has a curb weight of over 2800 pounds and uses 185 width tires. No problems at all for me!

A couple of other plusses with narrower tires include reduced tire noise (less contact area=less friction/noise. The other being a tighter allowable turning radius; DEFINTIELY a bonus, and should be noted in mini-utes that are likely to see city driving and spend time poking around parking lots!

Hope this helps someone...Thanks!

thegrad

scape2 · November 2005

Your claim of 0-60 in 7.5 seconds for your CRV is a good one. Get out on the net, go to google and type in Honda CRV 0-60 times.. There is NOTHING, anywhere that shows a 0-60 time of 7.5..
Also, may want to check your MPG claim on google too.. even right here in your own backyard at Edmunds forum Real World MPG ratins for CRV...
I notice how no Honda folks decided to challenge your claims....

scape2 · November 2005

"Ditto for the Escape, even though it needs big incentives to maintain volume."
Did you look and see what the incentives are before you typed this? You are once agains implying people are only buying Escapes just because of the incentives. Not because they may actually like the vehicle, or God forbid, like it better than the CRV!
Take a look at the incentives offered.. AND the restrictions. The Escape after 4 years of production is still the leading seller in this class by the way...

scape2 · November 2005

I cannot find the person who was unaware of the possible replacement for the Escape... So.. I will post this again..
There is a vehicle on the map for Ford called the "Equator". It debuted at the Taiwan motor show. Saw it on Motorweek about 3 weeks ago. It was said this is may be the replacement for the Ford Escape. Slightly larger and offering numerous safety features, 2 new engines and more transmission choices.. I guess we'll see...

blueiedgod · December 2005

Your claim of 0-60 in 7.5 seconds for your CRV is a good one. Get out on the net, go to google and type in Honda CRV 0-60 times.. There is NOTHING, anywhere that shows a 0-60 time of 7.5..
Also, may want to check your MPG claim on google too.. even right here in your own backyard at Edmunds forum Real World MPG ratins for CRV...
I notice how no Honda folks decided to challenge your claims....

They don't have to challenge my claim because there is nothing to challenge.

I get 30 mpg highway, 26 city, what else to challenege. I keep a log of my gas receipts and reset the trip odometer every fill up. Not rocket science.

Escape is getting 24 mpg highway, 19 City.

7.5 is the average G-tech reading when I tested it. Given, I don't have the fancy equipment like Edmunds, Car and Driver, and Road and track. But the same G-tech showed almost 9 seconds for our other car, 2005 Ford Escape XLT. This was done on the same day (40°F), with full tank of Mobil 87 gas from the same gas station. The average was of 4 runs (2 runs = round trip) in an abandoned parking lot.

blueiedgod · December 2005

I cannot find the person who was unaware of the possible replacement for the Escape... So.. I will post this again..
There is a vehicle on the map for Ford called the "Equator". It debuted at the Taiwan motor show. Saw it on Motorweek about 3 weeks ago. It was said this is may be the replacement for the Ford Escape. Slightly larger and offering numerous safety features, 2 new engines and more transmission choices.. I guess we'll see...

And the replacement for CR-V is still going to be called... CR-V. Maybe Ford is trying to get away from the name Escape, too many problems associated with it?

stever · December 2005

The Equator is positioned for Ford's Asian markets, or that's the story in most of the articles about it. Some of the parts, like maybe the engine(s), could wind up in rigs intended for North America.

varmint, "What about the future of Ford Inc??" #461, 16 Nov 2005 11:30 am

There is the Edge hanging out there to take over for the Escape, or perhaps just cannibalize sales.

Steve, Host

varmint · December 2005

"Did you look and see what the incentives are before you typed this?"

Yes.

"You are once agains implying people are only buying Escapes just because of the incentives."

No need to imply... I can come right out and say it.

When the CR-V bowed in 2002, it bested the Escape on the sales chart for a year. When Ford added incentives, sales of the Escape started to rise. Whenever Ford cuts incentives, sales drop.

For example, when Ford cut their employee pricing program, sales of the Escape dropped 36%... almost 6,000 units in one month!

thegraduate · December 2005

I would be willing to bet that for comparison purposes those times are accurate, but probably about a second or second and a half faster than reality. The difference in the two cars you tested with your equipment is probably right though, with about a 1.5 sec different.

Motor Trend tested a CR-V manual tranny and got 8.3 sec to 60mph (old story, but you can find it in an archive). The most recent Ford Escape test I have seen had it just over 10 seconds (it was a 4-speed auto, though, to be fair). Neither car has gotten faster with age, except for the automatic CR-V, which has gained a gear in its tranny (now on par with the manual). I don't think 0-60 mph times are a big priority to most cute-ute shoppers, but that's just my two cents!

thegrad

stevedebi · December 2005

"If they put some decent tires on it, put the shifter on the floor, extract 175+ HP from the 2.4L, and NOT add any more size or weight, it will be hard to resist. "

Actually, when the kids were young and in car-seats, in bad weather it was very convenient to be able to go to the back seat area by folding down the table between the front seats; don't try that with a floor mounter shifter! Count me as one who likes the dash mount, and the unique hand brake.

varmint · December 2005

"Neither car has gotten faster with age, except for the automatic CR-V, which has gained a gear in its tranny (now on par with the manual)."

The new 5AT has not increased performance. When running 0-60, you don't even reach 4th gear. Looking at the gear ratios, Honda did not "compact" the lower gears much at all. So performance gains are insignificant.

The extra gear is good for highway cruising. That, combined with the DBW system, allows for better fuel economy. Since the distance between 4th and 5th is not all that great, the CR-V can also kick down a gear while climbing grades and the driver probably won't notice. It's much better than going from 4th to 3rd at highway speeds. So smoother shifting is another benefit.

scape2 · December 2005

"Maybe Ford is trying to get away from the name Escape, too many problems associated with it? "
At typical Honda owner statement once again... With nothing to back it up. What "problems"? It is already known the Escape had problems its FIRST year. I also notice how when Honda folks bring this up they just list the problems. They fail to mention not all the problems affected all Escapes/Tributes in that model year. It was certain build lots/dates. Once again a Honda owner beating the drum and putting out mis-information.

scape2 · December 2005

Your 0-60 numbers won't fly.. Anyone doing research on the CRV on 0-60 times need only do a web search and see the average 0-60 is about 8.5.. I said.. AVERAGE..

scape2 · December 2005

Well then.. its either one or the other... Claims are being made the Escape is more expensive than the CRV.. If the Escape has incentives, wouldn't you think this would bring prices down to CRV levels then?
Anyone who actually looked and read the incentives will see they are not that great for the Escape. When applying the restrictions this makes them even less appetizing. When buying a car $500-1K doesn't make or break a deal for most people when deciding between two vehicles.

scape2 · December 2005

You quote the highest recorded 0-60 time for the Escape of 10seconds.. get out on the net do a google search.. average is about in the mid 8's... Also.. There is a sight that posts 10.7 0-60 for the CRV automatic...Why don't you bring this up?

varmint · December 2005

"Claims are being made the Escape is more expensive than the CRV.. If the Escape has incentives, wouldn't you think this would bring prices down to CRV levels then?"

It has nothing to do with whether the two vehicles cost the same. It's the price for what you get that's important. And the market has decided that the Escape is only worth buying if Ford helps to pay for it.

"Anyone who actually looked and read the incentives will see they are not that great for the Escape."

Then I guess they aren't reading. Cuz whenever Ford drops the incentives, sales of the Escape drop, too. I don't need theories to explain it... the proof is right there in the sales figures.

stevedebi · December 2005

"You quote the highest recorded 0-60 time for the Escape of 10seconds.. get out on the net do a google search.. average is about in the mid 8's... Also.. There is a sight that posts 10.7 0-60 for the CRV automatic...Why don't you bring this up?"

Huh? My post was about the dash mounted shifter and the parking brake.

thegraduate · December 2005

Looking at the gear ratios, Honda did not "compact" the lower gears much at all. So performance gains are insignificant.
Thanks for the post; can i trouble you for the gear ratios, or where I can find them? I haven't driven the 05+ CR-V, just the 02-04 models. I assumed the performance would increase a good deal, like the 02 Accord (4-spd auto) versus the 03 Accord (5 spd auto). Acceleration times dropped nearly a full second between 02 and 03 accords (4-cyl). I DO know that third gear in the 03+ Accords spins at least 800 rpm more (5,ooo rpms versus just over 4,000 at 70 mph (passing, for example) which puts the rpms right in the power peak, decreasing the ratio spread between 2nd and third, and benefitting passing performance greatly. Yes, an increase in horsepower and torque was there, too, but only enough to offset the added weight of the marginally larger car. This was my thinking in my earlier post.

thegraduate · December 2005

The Escape after 4 years of production is still the leading seller in this class by the way...

Does this include fleet sales? I know of two rent-a-wreck places that rent Escapes and Explorers as their SUV...generally the low-cost XLS models of each.

By the way, I looked at incentives on the Escape at my local Birmingham area dealer website...2,500 cash back plus 0.9% APR financing...and sales are STILL down 36 % since the "family pricing" lot-clearing ended?

explorerx4 · December 2005

cross terrains come in 2 flavors, oem(420 treadwear rating) and primo(700 treadwear rating). maybe they both ride the same.
one thing i don't like about homelink is that anyone with your car can get in your garage. i like being able to take my remote with me when i want to.

explorerx4 · December 2005

5 year ago, ford took a car platform(626), made an entry level suv. 5 years later with minimal changes to the escape, the competition is still trying to convince everyone they are better. ford sure is stupid.

varmint · December 2005

The 02 and 03 Accord are completely different cars with different engines as well as transmissions. :confuse:

As for the CR-V, here's the 200-2004 gearing.
2.684
1.535
0.974
0.638

And for 2005
2.652
1.517
1.037
0.738
0.566

So, as you can see, the lowest gears on the early models were actually slightly more aggressive than the new ones. The real changes are in the top 3 gears to make the CR-V both smoother shifting and more fuel efficient.

varmint · December 2005

4 years ago, Honda build an entry level SUV using a Civic platform with a 4 cyl engine. And sold more units than the Escape with both an I4 and a V6.

After a year of that, Ford started using bigger and bigger incentives to retain the sales crown. Meanwhile Honda dealers were getting MSRP for the CR-V.

Ford aint stupid. But they sure do have to work hard just to compete with a little buggy from a company that never built an SUV before 1996.

explorerx4 · December 2005

don't forget the tribute and mariner.
honda is not getting msrp for the cr-v. maybe when they only made a few, not anymore.

sockpuppet1969 · December 2005

I have been following this debate for a little while now. It seems to be the most active on the CRV board. This is funny to me because no one on either side of the argument seems like they would even consider purchasing the other vehicle.

I know that when I was looking for a small SUV (I have an '06 CRV-SE) I never even considered the Escape. That doesn't mean it is a bad car. I actually rented one 2 years ago and drove it from NC to Rochester NY and back. The way back was through a blizzard and the little truck handled the terrible weather without blinking. Still, I don't trust the reliability of the Escape. As far as engine performance, who cares! They both have enough power for everyday driving unless you drive like an idiot. If you need to tow then the CRV probably isn't the best choice but even then I don't think people who were considering a CRV would go to the Escape next.

The pools of potential buyers for these two vehicles, in my opinion, are mutually exclusive so why all the bickering?

explorerx4 · December 2005

you hit the nail on the head. neither 'camp' will consider the other(with an exception). my wife would not even get near a cr-v after riding in one, owned by a relative. the choice was an escape. end of story, at least for us. right now, all we have are fords.

explorerx4 · December 2005

was that new vehicle thread worth giving up the cr-v, just for the fun of posting? it cannot compete. sorry, tired.

blueiedgod · December 2005

You quote the highest recorded 0-60 time for the Escape of 10seconds.. get out on the net do a google search.. average is about in the mid 8's... Also.. There is a sight that posts 10.7 0-60 for the CRV automatic...Why don't you bring this up?

Why rely on HEARSAY, when I did my own comparo. I have BOTH, do you?

I have a manual CR-V. So, I can only compare what I have.
2005 CR-V EX 5 MAN and 2005 Escape XLT auto. IF there were an Escape XLT (V6) with stick, I would have compared that.

blueiedgod · December 2005

Your 0-60 numbers won't fly.. Anyone doing research on the CRV on 0-60 times need only do a web search and see the average 0-60 is about 8.5.. I said.. AVERAGE..

See the post ABOVE. I did my own comparo. Did you do your own?

blueiedgod · December 2005

At typical Honda owner statement once again... With nothing to back it up. What "problems"? It is already known the Escape had problems its FIRST year. I also notice how when Honda folks bring this up they just list the problems. They fail to mention not all the problems affected all Escapes/Tributes in that model year. It was certain build lots/dates. Once again a Honda owner beating the drum and putting out mis-information.

Let's see, you keep harping about the massive cover up on Hondas end. How dare they not call you and ask you if it were OK to turn the engine 180°. And you keep on saying that ALL CR-V's burst in flames, even though we know it is only 5% max, and it is due to human NEGLIGENCE during oil change and not due to design. HOWEVER, Ford has just added another recall to the list of recalls for Escape.

So, yes, typical Honda owner would tell the truth, rather than half-truths and baseless/factless accusations.

blueiedgod · December 2005

5 year ago, ford took a car platform(626), made an entry level suv. 5 years later with minimal changes to the escape, the competition is still trying to convince everyone they are better. ford sure is stupid.

First Toyota took a Corolla ptaform and made RAV4, coincidentally, Honda took Civic platform and came out with CR-V in 1996. Where was Ford in 1996? Took them quite a few years to realize that this is what people wanted. They took a midsize platform to make a mediocre vehicle with mediocre reliabity and mediocre fuel efficiency. Then they threw in a slew of incentives to make the gullible people think that they were getting a good deal. Seems like Ford never cought up to Honda and Toyota. So, yes, other makes, like KIA and Hyundai (same company now) are probably striving to catch up to Ford. But Ford is still catching up to Honda and Toyota. Looks like Ford is giving up anyway, I hear there is no more Escape/Trubite after 2007. There is a new 2006 RAV4 and 2007 CR-V coming out. No Escape, I guess Ford just realize they can't compete in the small SUV segment on price, fuel efficiency, reliabity and quality of assembly.

blueiedgod · December 2005

I have been following this debate for a little while now. It seems to be the most active on the CRV board. This is funny to me because no one on either side of the argument seems like they would even consider purchasing the other vehicle.

I have both, no one else on this board can say that. I am the only poster who is qualified to make the comparisons. Everything else is OPINION. Hear me, Scape, Explorer... ect?

suvshopper4 · December 2005

No wonder he's a god.

varmint · December 2005

Honda dealers were getting MSRP (or within $500 of it) for CR-Vs through 2002 and 2003. Essentially, the first two and a half years it was offered.

Even now, as the CR-V enters it's final year for this design, YTD sales are up and Honda isn't using big discounts. Meanwhile Escape sales are down despite having used huge discounts and fleet sales.

varmint · December 2005

My honest opinion of the Escape and Tribute is well documented, already.

varmint, "The Forums Test Drive Team" #54, 3 Aug 2003 9:00 pm

What transpires here is another matter entirely. Without naming names, there are participants here who simply attack, attack, and attack leaving little room for civil discussion. This thread is what it is... trash talk.

If you've got a serious question, ask it in a serious manner. We'll answer it.

tidester · December 2005

... we'd all be better off with a little less confrontation and provocation.

tidester, host

minuvera · December 2005

I purchased my 01 escape at the beginning of the year. It is the XLS with 2X4 and a V6. When I was shopping, my original purchase plan was to stay away from ford and buy a CR-V. The first thing I test drove was a RAV4 and a couple of 02 and 03 CR-Vs. I didn't really care for the pickup they offered. The small engines made a fair amount of background noise during acceleration and higher speeds, above 45 to 50MPH. They have a slightly better fuel efficiency. The only comparable escape is the 4 cylinder model in performance. One of the CRVs I test drove, an 01, had a shaking problem. When I test drove over 16 vehicles, I drove about 5 CRVs, 2 RAV4, 5 Escapes, a XL-7, a Pathfinder, a jeep Liberty, and a jeep grand cherokee. The escape V6 literally threw me back when I stepped on the accelerator. My uncle, who went with me to look at all of these vehicles, agreed with me. The high performance V6, one of the fastest 0-60 small suvs, had a better performance than many of the V8 vehicles we had tested, and own. The escapes performance is sturdy and fun to drive. It reminds me of a sports car. I have the automatic 4 speed transition. The CRV wins in fuel efficiency, but the escapes engineering and performance are a step above in my opinion. If I was going to make the choice again, the escape is a better choice. I read about many recalls on the escape, some new. I have had no recalls on my vehicle in the time I have owned it. It has been a very dependable vehicle. It has never stalled or had to go into the shop for anything but an oil change. I do agree that the CRV is a good vehicle, but when it comes to performance the Escape is a smoother ride, better acceleration, and better towing capacity. I do like some of the options in the interior of the CRV, but the escape has alot of these options available in their limited edition and XLT.

thegraduate · December 2005

So, as you can see, the lowest gears on the early models were actually slightly more aggressive than the new ones. The real changes are in the top 3 gears to make the CR-V both smoother shifting and more fuel efficient.

if the final drive ratio is the same, I stand corrected, but with two different transmissions, the final drive is likely to change. Any word?

The 02 and 03 Accord are completely different cars with different engines as well as transmissions.

Yes, i kinda figured that was understood. The engine has a similar horsepower peak (5800 rpm), and only slightly more power (enough to offset the weight), making the extra cog in the transmission the obvious "secret weapon" to the extra speed. In fact, in 2003, Motor Trend called the Accord's five-speed auto its secret weapon to it's uncommonly quick acceleration. So, i repost to you, the inquisitive car icon :confuse:

thanks!

thegrad

thegraduate · December 2005

I actually rented one 2 years ago

Wow, what are the odds of someone renting an Escape? Wait...very good odds actually, helping bolster Escape sales beyond personal sales (making sales seem better than they really are in the personal purchsing market)and lowering resale values for owners one Hertz at a time.

CR-V vs Escape

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles