Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Comments
My use would be a long daily highway commute in Maryland -- some snow, but not a whole lot. Also for family travel, esp camping -- some driving on unpaved roads but little or no demanding off-road. Two sons of average height in the back seats.
Re the engine: I certainly have no objection to a more powerful push, but don't need power for its own sake. I'm content with "sufficient" power (i.e., enough 0-60 and uphill oomph that I don't feel vulnerable). The tradeoff of better mileage and regular gas enters into the picture.
Camping, you say? The CR-V has a number of little touches that have made it the perfect camping vehicle for me. The picnic table, the wet/dry storage under the floor, and, while I haven't needed it yet, the "bed" in back makes a perfect place to stay if you end up getting flooded out of your tent. Note that the 2002 model's seats do not fold as flat as those in the 2001 model. It's more like a lounge chair than a bed.
2002 pic
97-01 pic
Since you're not headed too far off-road, you may also want to take a look at the Subaru Outback.
Still, isn't it nice to have a manual option? Kudos to those that do, and it sure can compensate for a lot.
Anyone seen a test with an auto CR-V yet? I'd be curious, because in some tests of the Forester the automatic was just as quick, if not quicker, than the 5 speed. Motorweek hit 60 in 9.1s with an automatic, and so did the Washington Post. That's quicker than some published times for the manual.
The Subaru boxer is torquey and mates well to an automatic. Given the CR-V hits its torque peak at a low 3600rpm, don't be surprised if the auto is just as quick. It'll be closer to the 5 speed than the last one, for sure.
Also, we should look at displacement, not the number of cylinders. Mazda made a 1.8l V6 for its MX3, remember those? Honda and Subaru use large 4 bangers with far more power and torque than that tiny V6's 130 horses.
-juice
I drove a 2001 CR-V automatic, which showed about 3100rpm at 75mph.
With an 88% lower overall final drive ratio, 3.517 for 2002 vs 3.704 for 2001, would indicate about 2700rpm at 75mph ... does that sound about right? (Tire size and profile are unchanged, so wheel diameter should also be unchanged.)
Thanks ... Bill
I think that's pretty reasonable for a 4 banger. I don't the auto ever really revved that high. The 5 speed was geared 7% shorter than the old auto was.
-juice
Of course, I'm one who thinks "luxury SUV" is an oxymoron to begin with, but I find one that's "posing" that direction even more objectionable than the real thing. Not that I'm against comfort or a quiet, smooth ride - in fact I insist on all three. I guess I'm over reacting to the Lincoln Navigator syndrome. A vehicle that even smacks a little of that, and there's an odor of it in the HL, makes me want to sneer. The CR-V (in pix of course) looks less pretentious.
Just my curmudgeonly perspective.
-juice
You pay more with the Highlander, but it can also do so much more. You're really comparing apples and oranges. They're both in different market slots. Bottom line: What do you plan to use the vehicle for?
Bob
"...returning 13km per liter in mixed cycle (10-15 mode) Japanese driving tests, meeting governmental fuel consumption standards for 2012."
...it looks like the '02 JDM CR-V is getting an average of 30 mpg. The engine only puts out about 155 hp and 141 lb-ft (still more than the current model). But a 30 mpg average would make some friends with the eco-conscious and thrifty. Acceleration would probably be similar to the new RAV4, but the mpg combined with the added utility would far outclass it. I imagine, this would also be cheaper than the hybrid version that has been rumored.
As for the HL being "more comfortable to take a trip in" - we know they're both roomy inside, the
HL's quiet, smooth - the Honda's reported to be as well - I don't know why you come to that conclusion, except the perception that the HL is more "luxurious"?
I'm going to wait and decide based on actually driving the CR-V for myself. I've got a suspicion the perception may be no more than that.
but what i wanted was them clear ones like
the headlights... until i learned that they
were illegal in NJ
Barnone - I plan on adding tinted windows sooner or later (it's been on my "to do" list for a year). Along with the red tails, it should have a more "uniform" look to it. My hope is that the attention will be drawn aways from the lights and interior and the Sebring Silver paint will stand out more.
leech-dealers kept the HL out of my budget. so,
goodbye HL hello CR-V!
i wanted an HL because i have driven a RWD version
of the HL and it handled excellently through
twisty mountains plus it was stable at highway
speeds. the downside is that RWD HL i drove had
this funny sickness where the domelight bulb
always got busted and the toyota guys would say
that "just replace the bulb" (which we rarely used)
and all the other parts (stereo, battery, etc.)
went defective just 1-2 months right after the
warranty expired. *sheeeeeshhhh*
i'm glad to own one of the most reliable cars
in the world... a cr-v!
*scratches head*
anyways, i wanted to tint my V but NJ laws only
allow half of the windows to be tinted. d*nnn!
my last trip to boston was when the summer heat
made the temp rise up to 100 degrees F plus...
my skin was toast after exposure in my tintless V
The amount of room is only one measure of comfort. Yes the Highlander offers more luxury features, so I would assume it has an edge in comfort. Also a larger V6 is usually more comfortable than a smaller 4-cylinder. My guess is that an entry-level Highlander could compare with a CRV. A nicer-equipped and more commonly found Highlander is clearly a notch above. A more logical comparison is between the CRV and Rav4, not the Highlander.
I've driven a well-equipped Highlander, and I've driven several first-generation CRVs. There's no comparison. The Highlander is light-years nicer. Now, the new CRV is a big improvement over the old model, but I seriously doubt it has closed the gap completely.
Finally, the Highlander does not come in RWD. It's either FWD or AWD.
Bob
Barnone - In 2001, Satin Silver replaced Sebring Silver, which was used for U.S. CR-Vs in the '97-'00 model years.
there is a 1.8L version of the HL in asia. the
engine is tuned for max torque. of course, there
are no luxury options. just the basic convenience
items.
slugline:
roads in japan are much more decent to drive on
than here in the states. maybe that's a factor
varmit:
you mentioned that your V handles snow very well.
do you have a skidplate installed? or is it not
necessary? i dont go off road that's why i'm
undecided about a skidplate.
2.0L I4 vs. 3.7L V6
148 HP vs. 210
$22,189 vs. $28,039
2,943lbs vs. 4,229
165" length vs. 183.7"
Hey, even the number of seats varies!
Barnone - Drive down to the St. Augustine's Scrub with a few of us and you may win an award for most "bone stock" 'V. The Racoon and I are gunning for longest drive. I'm coming from Boston, he's headed from Rochester, NY.
do you have a skidplate installed? or is it not
necessary? i dont go off road that's why i'm
undecided about a skidplate.
btw, i can't access the url.
common add-ins.
maybe you should compare the 4-banger HL to even
things up a bit...
There have been several reports of higher mpg after installing the skidplate. I bought mine to see if it had any effect. So far, it hasn't. I've always gotten better than aveage mpg, anyway.
The URL is working for me. Browser problem, maybe? Try agian?
It seems Honda has decided to push the hybrid powerplant across the board (if you believe the rumors). At the temple of vtec site they have an item about the next NSX having a hybrid powerplant. If that is true then we will probably see these engines as options across the Honda lineup.
too bad that FL is too far for me, i work
6 days a week
better mpg? maybe because the skidplate's
aerodynamic effect lifting up the V
therefore less weight, less engine stress.
D'OH! what do i know about those things!
Bob
I am about to purchase a new SUV (probably within the next few days) My first choice would be the highlander, but since I work for a living and don't have piles of cash lying around, I checked out the CR-V
Not that I would willingly abandon Toyotas, but this will be my wife's car, and she gets to pick it out (within reason of course. We certainly didn't give the Santa Fe a first glance let alone a second) I know Honda makes a quality vehicle, and I know I can feel comfortable with my wife driving one.
I looked at a Silver 2001 CR-V EX and was surprised by the way it drove. Much niccer than I expected. Of course it is no Highlander in regards to compfort, but I paying $10,000 less feels pretty comfortable to me! The lack of a passenger arm rest got me scratching my head, but I imagine I could get an aftermarket arm rest if need be.
I was able to negotiate a price of $20,500, which I guess seems reasonable from the research I have done.
My question for the group is:
Should I purchase this CR-V now, or should I wait until the 2002s are available?
What are the major differences between the two? I see from the messages that the new CR-V MSRP will be approx 23000, so I wanted to know if the extra 3000 will be worth the wait for a 2002.
What do you think?
The "worth it" equation - well, that's up to you of course. Most agree that the '01 and earlier versions were short on power, but there are people happily driving them who apparently are OK with the engine. I personally didn't care for the driving position, and that, plus the relatively weak engine, were enough to make me want to wait to check out the '02, but again, if you're OK with all that - why not save the $? You can get a good deal right now on an '01, but you can bet the dealers are giong to hold out for something close to MSRP on the '02s, at least for the first few months they are out. Good luck!
i could buy a nice HDTV for the $3K
Remember, you're going to have to "live" with this vehicle for several years. Make you you get something you'll be happy with.
Bob
Highlanders are pricey, but they do offer a big V6, stability/traction control, and always-on all wheel drive. It'll compete with the Honda MDX when it comes out.
-juice
Last weekend in the Chicago Tribune Grand Honda in Elmhurst, Illinois had SE CR-V's on sale for $20,800, and $19,700 for an EX. I called, and they said all colors available for SE, can't remember about EX. That price included the destination charge, so it seems to me that this was about $400 below invoice. I also found a listing on usenet of a person in Calif. who got an LX for $700 below invoice, and I confirmed it with an email to him. The grand honda website is something like www.grandhonda.com.
I'd like to thank varmit for a reply on ABS on the 2002 CR-V.
-mt
Do I call them back and give them a price??
From reading your many knowledgeable posts--I don't thing this is a great price?
Any suggestions are welcome!!!! thanks
I remember reading somewhere that in Japan, the CR-V is actually a competitor against the Lexus RX300, as well as the RAV4.
Toyotafan5 - There are numerous differences. Highlights would be the engine, safety, refinements, added equipment, and cargo space/versatility.
I'd actually pick that HR-V's looks over the new CR-V. It would also be a true mini-ute.
But on the bright side, the alloy wheels look very nice.
GM and Ford Credit Ratings Are Lowered
As S&P Cites Slowdown and Competition
..."We just don't see that the profit potential is going to be the same for these companies," said S&P analyst Scott Sprinzen.
He pointed to worsening price competition and the growing threat from foreign rivals to the U.S. auto makers' dominance in the market for pickups and sport-utility vehicles, which have been the main sources of profits for GM and Ford for years. Mr. Sprinzen said it will be difficult for the companies to bring discounts down substantially when the interest-free financing offers expire at the end of the month...
http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB1003175211353685920.htm
No one doubts Ford's marketing ability. They have nearly always been able to move the goods whatever their virtues or lack thereof- the Pinto, Granada and present Taurus are examples. "Cheap" upfront, their higher costs are the LT experience.
When 0% goes, and it will, Ford's sales should tank - unless another expensive marketing scheme is launched. Still, analysts seem to agree that Ford is merely shifting future Ford brand sales forward by such schemes - remember they are not gaining market share, just limiting their market share losses.
The problem for Ford is that they're losing money now and can't shutter production due to UAW contracts. That means ballooning inventories and future "KMART" brand sales. People will have come to expect huge discounts on Ford brand products. That can't be good.
btw, does Ford offer a 5-speed with the V-6 Escape? If not, then the CR-V is definitely the faster vehicle as the C&D tests indicate. If Ford does, then the big engine Escape may be able to keep up with the CR-V, though with a severe mileage penalty to go along with the no doubt severe quality penalty vis a vis Honda's willing little quarter horse.
Thorn - Ford does not offer a 5 speed with the V-6 Escape (or the Mazda Tribute). However, even with the automatic slushbox, the Escape is a faster vehicle. I've seen 0-60 times in the low 8 second range, even a 7.9 second run. I expect that the C&D's 8.4 seconds for the 5 speed CR-V is going to be about average for the vehicle. Motor Trend has a different testing philosophy and may be able to ring a single 8.0 second run out of the 5 speed, but I doubt that'll be the norm.
1-800-375-less. Only add is a $49 doc fee. Ask for John Page.
INKY
60 mph. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8.8
http://www.caranddriver.com
btw, just in, first Forbes
http://www.forbes.com/2001/10/15/1015ford.html
and now the NYTimes is reporting that the head of Ford is being shown the door.
...Jacques A. Nasser, the chief executive of the Ford Motor Company (news/quote), will probably be out of a job by the end of the year, according to a person close to the company....
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/16/business/16FORD.html