Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

CR-V vs Escape

1…152153155157158…167

Comments

  • drive62drive62 Member Posts: 637
    Scape2 sold his Escape. I think that speaks volumes.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    And someone may have gotten a great deal on a used Escape.

    Shall we get back to comparing car notes? Please?
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Member Posts: 2,798
    After 75,000 trouble free miles I was still waiting for this predication from the Honda crowd!

    I no longer own the Escape

    You answered your own question.

    Both "the Graduate" and I asked you to come back and report reliability of the 2001 Escape at 150,000, 200,000 and 500,000 miles. I guess you won't be doing that. So, you will have to settle with what CR, and other credible sources say: "Honda is better than Ford"
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,314
    jousting with 'varm. he sold his cr-v. conclusion?
    escape and cr-v are entry level vehicles in their class.
    many people move on for their own reasons.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Well, I think it says a lot that he chose another Ford, albeit one of a different class (a midsize sedan instead of a cute-ute). He has his brand loyalty, and Fords continue to please him. There's nothing wrong with that, and it speaks well of Ford's initial satisfaction (it says nothing for long-term, is what blueiedgod was saying, I think), because he kept is about 5 years and 75,000 miles, a relatively short span in a car's long life.
  • drive62drive62 Member Posts: 637
    Scape2 sold his Escape and got a Fusion, kind of different vehicles. varmint moved up to an MDX, same class of vehicle. Both stayed with their brand though. I said earlier Scape2 is consistent (right down to arguing with other Honda owners about his Fusion vs. their Honda). Many buyers are, brand loyalty is very prevalent.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    brand loyalty is very prevalent

    Interesting point; I have had 3 Nissans in the last 25 years (two Datsun wagons and still driving a Quest assembled by Ford) so I guess I'm a bit partial to them.

    But I've had 2 VWs, a Plymouth, a Toyota and a Subaru in that time too, and I shopped Honda hard last time around (to the point of going home to get my checkbook before I got mad at the dealer).

    When I'm ready to buy again, I guess I'll see which brand has the best sale going on and who has the least idiotic dealer that week. :P
  • terry92270terry92270 Member Posts: 1,247
    As for brand loyalty, you can say that again!

    I have owned four motor homes. Two from Ford, one on a GM platform, the current is a diesel pusher. I had the GM based one in between the two Fords. Nothing but transmission problems, and this is constantly a complaint of owners in the RV publications. Just something GM can't get right for big loads. The Ford Super Duty platform is, and always has been, impeccable. The Taurus I had was a superlative workhorse as well.

    Aside from the GM platform Bus style RV, I also had a 2005 Impala, SS. It was a great car, and somewhat restored my confidence in Detroit until I bought a TransAM. :sick:

    Overall, I have never had the bad experiences with dealers or vehicles with Subaru, Nissan and Toyota, that I have had with the Big Three.
  • mikefm58mikefm58 Member Posts: 2,882
    Thx for the report. Reliable? Not even close to my '99 with 125K miles. Only two issues I've had are the radiator cracked and the driver's side door power lock doesn't work.
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Member Posts: 2,798
    jousting with 'varm. he sold his cr-v. conclusion?
    escape and cr-v are entry level vehicles in their class.
    many people move on for their own reasons.

    I think Varmint had over 100,000 miles on the CR-V. Scape didn't. Maybe he didn't think that his Trouble Free Escape could remain as trouble free approaching 100,000 miles.
  • terry92270terry92270 Member Posts: 1,247
    The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has released it's list of the safest cars for 2007.

    The Institute breaks the cars down into the following categories: large Car, midsize Car, minivan, luxury SUV, midsize SUV and small SUV.

    In the large car market, only the Audi A6 earned top honors. In the midsize car ratings, the Audi A4, Saab 9-3, and Subaru Legacy (with optional electronic stability control). And in Minivans, the Hyundai Entourage and Kia Sedona both earned top honors.

    Moving to the SUV class, in the Luxury series, the Volvo XC90 and Mercedes M class topped the list. In the midsize arena, the Acura RDX and Honda Pilot both earned high marks. Finally, in the small SUV size, the Honda CR-V and Subaru Forester (with optional electronic stability control) took top honors.

    Interestingly, not one American car made the list this year.... :sick:

    The Institute rates vehicles as good, acceptable, marginal, or poor based on performance in high-speed front and side crash tests, plus evaluations of seat/head restraints for protection against neck injuries in rear impacts.

    The first requirement for a vehicle to become a Top Safety Pick is to earn good ratings in all three Institute tests.

    A new requirement for 2007 is that the winning vehicles must offer electronic stability control. This addition is based on Institute research indicating that electronic stability control significantly reduces crash risk. Especially the risk of fatal single vehicle crashes. The electronic control helps drivers maintain control of their vehicles during emergency maneuvers.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,314
    i chose 'varm because his posts were intelligent.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    I think Varmint had over 100,000 miles on the CR-V. Scape didn't. Maybe he didn't think that his Trouble Free Escape could remain as trouble free approaching 100,000 miles.

    C'mon now, let's not put words in anybody's mouth; that's not really fair to scape. He suggests that Ford's are unreliable more than most people on here, I don't think you have to do that for him.

    A lot of people (my father, for example) trade cars just because they want something new. My dad rarely goes over 2 years with his cars, any cars. Usually, they have about 60k miles when he trades.

    My mom's cars last a lot longer around here; the last two consisted of a 1993 Accord, traded with 115,000 miles on her 2000 Odyssey, which we had only 39,000 when traded in 66 months later (in Nov. 2005 for my 2006 Accord EX).
  • drive62drive62 Member Posts: 637
    In addition to brand loyalty I guess I'm guilty of brand disloyalty.

    My first new vehicle purchase was a GM product. It was in the mid 80's, arguably their low point in terms of....well, everything. Sold it two years later and bought a Honda which performed flawlessly. So when it was time for my next vehicle purchase I bought another Honda, and then another Honda. All the Hondas (including the current, knock wood) were/are excellent vehicles.

    I know the domestics have made progress in terms of quality, reliability, etc. but I see no reason to fix what isn't broken and change my brand affiliation.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    "guilty of brand disloyalty"

    That's another interesting thing about human psychology I guess. I had two '74 Volvo sedans and they both were unreliable (one was wrecked and was replaced with a similar one). I've been leery of them ever since.

    But I also drove a new '73 or '74 Jeep CJ-5 for three years and I've told people for years about how peppy it was off the line and how good it ran. I keep forgetting how the gas tank rusted away (the soft top that rotted away I could understand) and I also had issues with the windshield wiper motor, and probably some other stuff that I've forgotten.

    One of my 70ish SuperBeetles broke down a lot but it was fixable with some matchsticks in the alternator so that was sort of a fun memory. My wife made me sell it right after we met, lol.

    Never say never - better go hit the GM showroom and take another look around!
  • drive62drive62 Member Posts: 637
    Never say never - better go hit the GM showroom and take another look around!

    Maybe after I had gone through every Honda available, then Toyota, then Subaru (which had a GM slant to it at one time), then the Koreans, then..... Way too many good options out there before GM would even enter my radar. But if I were looking for a used vehicle, you can't beat a 50% markdown on a one year old vehicle, but then again it is a GM, and I don't buy used ;) .
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    Don't you ever wonder why its golden word when someone says "My Honda/Toyota went 1 million miles with no problems" Yet when a Ford/GM person comes in and says thier GM/Ford product went 1 million miles it cannot be true?? Take a look at the reliability ratings of the Escape/Tribute/Mariner at MSN reliability ratings. Your going to be surprised. Also, as I mentions the Escape come in right behind the CRV, I mean right behind in TCO here at Edmunds. My wife owns an 04 Tribute ES V6 4WD and so far its been fine too! Hmm.. pattern here? ;)
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Yet when a Ford/GM person comes in and says thier GM/Ford product went 1 million miles it cannot be true??

    Would you mind showing me an instance like this? Something must have happened for you to say this; either that, or you like being a Ford martyr.
  • drive62drive62 Member Posts: 637
    No doubt plenty of GM and Ford products have been reliable, but I think it's pretty fair to say that older imports on the road outnumber older domestics.

    I don't think an '04 Mazda (kind of funny you use an import brand to defend the longevity of domestics---yes I know it's essentially an Escape---but it still is branded Mazda) qualifies for longevity. My father's '91 Ford Escort (although it was heavily influenced by Mazda--which was still a Japanese automaker at that time--it is a Ford) looks like it is finally getting put out to pasture. Not a ton of miles, but it had a long life. I'm sure he fact that he is a shade tree mechanic helped.

    Come back and report on your Mazda in thirteen years :) .
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Member Posts: 2,798
    In addition to brand loyalty I guess I'm guilty of brand disloyalty.

    I guess I am guilty too, here is my timeline.

    1983 Chevy Celebrity V6, my first car, bought used in 1994) drove for a year and it fell apart.

    1985 Honda Civic DX. My first Honda. Bought it with 200,000 miles ($1000), drove it for 1.5 years. The motor mounts broke when I overloaded with my sister's stuff to move her to college. Stupid me sold her (with broken motor mount for $1500 with 250,000 miles). Yes, I sold a broken car for more than I paid for it 18 months earlier.

    1987 Honda Accord LXi. I ended up giving that car to my sister a year later. She drove it into a bank wall when she mistook the accelerator for the brake (she is blonde)

    1988 Honda Prelude Si 4WS, I still have this car. She is resting in the garage until I find a suitable exhaust system for it. There are not too many options for cars with a steering rack in the front and a steering rack in the back. She still starts right up.

    1991 VW Jetta, those were the dark days. I liked the handling of the car, but I did not realize how troublesome VW's were.

    1999 Honda Civic EX Coupe, my first new car. Never gave me a problem, but after a few winters I wanted an SUV. I traded her in for a

    2001 Honda CR-V SE. Nice little SUV, it was my second car with Automatic, and I hated it. The first auto was the '83 Celibrity. Luckily, someone liked the CR-V more than I and it was stolen from me. It was later found by the Yankee Stadium, stripped. I restored her myself and then traded in for the

    2002 Honda Civic Si. It was a great little car, but I moved to Buffalo and got stuck in snow a few times with it. Even though I had good tires, the low clerance would make it ride up on the snow (center line) and lift the wheels off the ground. I traded the Si for

    2005 Honda CR-V EX.

    Even though I did not personally own any Fords, my girlfriend is a Ford gal. When I met her, she had a

    1993 Ford Taurus. I took the responsibility of keeping it running. Those were busy times. She wanted to sell it, but no one would give her mroe than $600 for a 6 year old Taurus with 140,000 miles on it (compare to 10 year old Civic with broken engine mount at 250,000 miles for $1500) She finally gave in and traded it in for $600 for a

    1999 Ford Escort ZX2. When we moved to gether we started car pooling in the CR-V and she had to sell it. She could only score $6000 for a 2.5 year old Escort with 20,000 miles. (Compare to 1999 Civic EX that was traded in for CR-V and given $11,000 trade in allowance, both cost $15,000 new)
    Then our jobs changed and we needed two cars again. She got a
    2002 Ford Focus SE. Then we moved to Buffalo, and when I got the CR-V, she leased an Escape. Ford dealer would not give her more than $6000 for her mint Focus (I got $12,500 for the Si, both cost about $15,000 new).
  • drive62drive62 Member Posts: 637
    Kind of interesting. I hope the Green crowd support these types of products.

    Sit down for the real inside story on Escape

    Published November 30, 2006

    LOS ANGELES -- Every little bit helps, though at Ford Motor Co. it would be more appropriate to say every litter bit helps.

    Ford unveiled the 2008 Escape SUV at the Los Angeles Auto Show--the gasoline and gas/electric versions will go on sale early next year.

    Escape promotes a new design that bears a strong resemblance to the midsize Explorer and full-size Expedition, so all Ford sport-utility vehicles have that family look about them.

    But it's what's inside this Escape that merits a close look. It included a center console that for the first time will let you hide a laptop or purse inside.

    Yet what's most novel are the seats, which are made of discarded Dr Pepper, Pepsi, Coke or even milk bottles as well as Uncle Harry's golf slacks and Aunt Mabel's frock. Throw in a few pair of old socks for good measure.

    But the seats won't be lumpy. Escape, you see, will be the first automotive application of seat fabric made from 100 percent recycled materials. It's supplied by Interface Fabrics and made from what they call "post-industrial recycled materials."

    Translated, that means old plastic bottles and old clothing--from garbage can and attic to passenger cabin, not landfills.

    As an added benefit, the material is waterproof.

    Appropriately, the hybrid Escape and hybrid Mercury Mariner will offer the cloth as standard. It will be optional in the gasoline Escape and Mariner. No price as yet.

    For those keeping track, Ford estimates that using recycled material will save 7 million kilowatt hours of electricity and 600,000 gallons of water that would have gone into the production of virgin fibers.

    And Escape and Mariner will be just the start, Ford says.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Total garbage. ;)

    ...Pun intended.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,314
    glad you have good luck with your hondas. some of the prices paid say more about the people than the vehicles.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • gregagrega Member Posts: 31
    The new Escape already looks like a dated boxy Explorer and the new CR-v has an interesting, curved and upscale appearance. The Escape interior, while new is too square and boxy while most of the competition has gone with flowing curved and more elegant interiors.

    I owned an '02 Escape and it was an OK suv, but sounded like a tin-can when you closed the doors and it was very noisy - too utilitarian, like the new Escape, not for me.
  • drive62drive62 Member Posts: 637
    Seems to me the new CR-V has morphed into an almost CUV while the new Escape remains an SUV. Although I'm sure there will be some crossover shoppers I think they now serve different markets, certainly more than the previous models did. I'm not up to date on the new Edge, but maybe that will more in this new CUV category.

    BTW with the latest sales figures, Ford is number four. I guess there is a new definition of "The Big Three".
  • drive62drive62 Member Posts: 637
    The Edge is in a different league than the CR-V. Local paper has a review of the new Ford Edge. Price as tested was $36,175 :surprise:, review specifically mentions how the options carry a hefty premium. MPG rating is 17/24 for the AWD model :( .
  • terry92270terry92270 Member Posts: 1,247
    Well, lots of people prefer to think of "their" particular vehicle as a SUV. If you aren't driving a Jeep, Land Rover or the like, it is just your good idea.

    Escape, CR-V, Santa Fe, Murano, Pilot, all of those are more car than truck and not true SUV's. Most even include warnings in the owners manual that they are not made for real off road use, more than a dirt Forest Service road.... ;)
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,314
    if can say one thing defense of the escape as an suv, the low speed throttle control is great. i spent almost 2 hours in stop and go real slow traffic for 10+ miles. my outside temp went to 100+ degrees, but the throttle remained predictable the whole time.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • terry92270terry92270 Member Posts: 1,247
    Well, not being a "real" SUV doesn't mean all those vehicles I mentioned above aren't damn fine cars. :)

    I also noticed that in my Brother's GL450, the throttle remained constant as well....
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,314
    it wasn't my idea to buy an escape in the first place, and i don't usually drive it, but i gained some appreciation for it, after taking it on a road trip.
    i didn't notice too many escapes or GL450's while i was out on the sand in obx in my explorer. :)
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    If your car buying decisions are primarily based on resale value, then you're right to buy Honda over Ford.
  • jthor1jthor1 Member Posts: 4
    You know , I went to a course set up to introduce the new CR-V and drive through slalom and speed courses and the absoulute WORST VEHICLE THERE WITHOUT A QUESTION WAS THE FORD ESCAPE! The Ford Escape was very cheap and had NO power whatsoever at all.I would never buy a Ford Escape and I would never understand why someone would , not to mention all the problems they have and the fact that you can get a HUGE rebate means nothing at all b/c all that does for your car is put its value in the toilet!The Ford and Chevy Corporations are doing themselves in by giving the rebates.I guess it seems that most people look at only price and not quality or resale b/c if they did care about these things they would never buy the Escape.I feel really bad for the folks that pass on a CR-V to go to a vehicle I wouldnt rank any higher than a Kia in order to save a few bucks, But I assure you come trade in time they will regret the decision and that money they saved will now be money lost on thier investment.
  • jthor1jthor1 Member Posts: 4
    Buying the Honda isnt just to have a better resale , its just simply hands down a superior Vehicle to the Ford. There is only one reason to buy a Ford over a Honda and its Price which the prices are not all that much of a difference.
  • jthor1jthor1 Member Posts: 4
    Believe me bud , I have driven both and the Escape isnt in the same class as the Honda after driving them. I have seen no info ranking the escape near the CR-V and if anything the escape could beat the CR-V on it would be over all sales b/c the Escape is #1 in sales since it happens to be cheap .The CR-V is the cream of the crop in its class and the ranking I saw showed the CR-V setting the bar wayyyyy higher than the competion ...nobody ranked that close to it.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    I was just speaking generally in terms of buying a car purely for resale value, but in the case of the Escape and CRV, the CVR is the winner regardless to resale value.
  • srangersranger Member Posts: 106
    You obviously did not drive a V6 Escape if you think that the CR-V has more power.

    The CR-V is a good little mini-van ( like the Escape ).

    However, in a AWD V6 edition, it puts the CR-V to shame in most preformance comparisons. The CR-V also has a rather pathetic towing capacity realitive to the 3500lb of the V6 Escape...

    There are good reasons to own both and blanket statments that one is better than the other are pointless...
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    How does a small SUV become a mini-van?? In my books, a minivan has 3 rows, flat floor (like a van) and sliding doors.
  • srangersranger Member Posts: 106
    I think a vehicle has to be a lot more off road capable (locking differentials, low speed gear boxes, higher ground clearance, skid plates, etc.) to be classified as a true SUV.

    Men typically don’t like the (fair or unfair) wimpy reputation of driving a minivan. In order to appeal to more than just females, the car companies cleverly disguised little minivans to look like the more rugged truck based SUVs. So, in my opinion (I said opinion) these crossovers and little "SUV's" are nothing more than AWD minivans that men will drive.
  • drive62drive62 Member Posts: 637
    However, in a AWD V6 edition, it puts the CR-V to shame in most preformance comparisons.

    Wrong. Scroll back through some of the 7000+ posts here to see the stats that show how a manual transmission CR-V (2nd generation) holds it's own against the V6 Escape. Or just look for the data online.

    Haven't seen the acceleration times for the new CR-V, but in no way is the CR-V "put to shame" by the Escape. If anything, it's the other way around. A 4 banger almost equaling a V6, Honda's superior engineering technology at it's finest.
  • srangersranger Member Posts: 106
    Yea right,

    You compare a manual 4 banger to a automatice V6 and think you have proved somthing... That is apples to oranges my friend...

    I'll be happy to put my V6 Mariner up against your little 4 banger any day and any amount you care to wager my friend....

    And for the record, how many manual CR-V are sold in the US?????

    And just what is the towing capacity of that super powerful 4 banger/manual you speak of???
  • stevedebistevedebi Member Posts: 4,098
    "'And for the record, how many manual CR-V are sold in the US????? "

    None at this time, they no longer offer the MT. They did not sell many.

    "And just what is the towing capacity of that super powerful 4 banger/manual you speak of???"

    1500 lbs, although the smaller European engine (2.0L) is rated for 3000 lbs if the tow has it's own brakes. So I suspect the US model could also match that. But the official value is 1500 lbs.

    Not sure what this matters; no one has claimed any towing advantage for the CR-V over the Escape.

    However, there is no question that Honda engine technology is superior. The bare fact that an 2.4L I4 without turbo or supercharging can come even close to a 3.0L V6 engine tells the entire story.
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    Haven't seen the acceleration times for the new CR-V, but in no way is the CR-V "put to shame" by the Escape.

    MT hit 60 in 9.9 seconds. They typically use an agressive method to obtain their times, one which a daily driver would never attempt, so it looks like the new gen is significantly slower than the last gen. More weight maybe?

    Edmunds did it in 9.8 seconds FWIW.

    None of this means much as neither of the above tested an Escape at the same time plus the '08 Escape will likely be slower due to some added weight and it has definitely not been tested yet.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Last I checked, the last V-6 Escape I saw tested had a 0-60 time of 10.6 seconds (a 2005 XLT Sport in Aug 2004's Motor Trend in the same magazine that listed the CR-V at 9.9 seconds (in the recent 2007 SUV of the Year report). Seems like neither is particularly fast, but both are equally adequate. I figure this gives the Escape the advantage of being a little lighter back in 2005 than it would be in 2007. The magazine test all vehicle in the same way, to get the most out of an acceleration run.

    Both cars were automatics (the Escape a 4A, the CR-V a 5A) with AWD.

    The Escape would definitely win towing wars.

    The CR-V 2WD gets 23/30MPG, the AWD 22/28MPG
    The Escape with AWD gets 18/23 MPG, 20/24 MPG with 2WD.

    So, similar (if you don't want to believe better) accleration with an extra 3-4 MPG in town, 5-6 MPG better on the highway.

    Unless towing, my opinion is that CR-V has a very competitive model when comparing acceleration and fuel consumption with Escape unless you need to tow 3k pounds, in which you need a V6.
  • srangersranger Member Posts: 106
    The BAD info that people try to post is amazing. Here is a review of the 2006 Mariner ( Tarted up Escape ).

    The 4 banger 0-60 is 9.8sec, the V6 is 8.6sec.

    http://www.trucktrend.com/roadtests/suv/163_0504_2005_mercury_mariner/

    I have personaly seen 0-60 in the 8.5sec range with my 2005 V6 Mariner. ( Wife ran it at the track one day when I was running my Mustang )
  • terry92270terry92270 Member Posts: 1,247
    From that article:

    2005 Mercury Mariner V-6

    Price range $22,358-$27,200
    Layout Front engine, FWD/AWD, 4-door, 5-pass SUV
    Engine 2.3L/153-hp I-4 or 3.0L/200-hp V-6
    0-60 mph, sec 9.8/8.6 (I-4/V-6)
    On-sale date Currently

    Glad to see the little woman bested Motor Trend's test drivers! :P
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Alright, I'm just using one piece of info. One magazine, one type of testing procedure. Not bad info; if you want to accuse me of lying just do it already (you are implying it with saying I'm posting "bad information"), but you can check the issues of the magazines I've posted if you want - the info is there. 10.6 for V6 XLT Sport Escape, 9.9 for CR-V EX AWD. Using one type of test procedure (or one magazine's numbers) was the most unbiased way I knew how to post information. Different magazines will undoubtedly use different test methods, which is why I chose one, Motor Trend.
  • baggs32baggs32 Member Posts: 3,229
    You should always choose the same source but you also have to make sure they were tested on the same day by the same person. If they were from different articles one could have been tested in the heat of summer and the other in the cold of winter. Cold air makes you go a little faster. Also altitude, humididty, driver weight, etc. can come into play.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    If you find me a recent comparison I'd be elated to see it. The last one I remember involved a 2002 CR-V manual transmission, which tested 0-60 in 8.3 sec (many years ago). I figured choosing the same magazine at least narrowed down SOME of the parameters.

    Again, we are talking tenths of a second, which is why I said they were basically equal, and both adequate. If both are under 12 seconds to 60MPH, you aren't going to die trying to merge. If you want a hot-rod cute-ute, get a Saturn Vue (with Honda's 3.5L 250 hp V6) or a RAV4 (with a 3.5L 268 hp V6). Both should get you to 60 MPH in 7 seconds.
  • srangersranger Member Posts: 106
    If you like, I can post several more recent examples that put the 2005 and later V6 Escape/Mariner in the 8.5-8.9 second range of 0-60. Also, since I have the advantage of owning one, I knew that the info you posted was not accurate for the current models. I was not trying to say you were lying, I just wanted to point out that the information was not accurate...

    I should also note that mine is a FWD not AWD and that will makes mine a little quicker as it is about 150lb lighter...
  • thegraduatethegraduate Member Posts: 9,731
    Just realize what you are saying and comparing; you are asking me to believe that a nationally circulated, VERY well-known and long-running magazine, has less accurate numbers with their more sophisticated and exact measuring tools than you, someone who I don't know if they are a 9 year old or a 99 year old on the other side of this forum. While I don't think you are a liar or 9 year old, I just tend to believe something that is well-known and published, vs someone driving their car against a stopwatch.

    FWD vs AWD will make a big difference; the CR-V numbers we have are from AWD models, so if we compare your car to an AWD CR-V, we aren't comparing apples-to-apples. It's like comparing apples-to-caramel apples. Just saying yours is FWD makes you much more credible in my eyes :).

    AWD adds weight AND friction.

    How about this - AWD Escapes/Mariners and CR-Vs are around 10 seconds, with the FWD models a little quicker. Neither will get you run over.

    Can we agree on that and move past the acceleration talk?
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles