Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Honda CR-V or Accord or ?

thepinkelefantthepinkelefant Posts: 2
edited December 2013 in Honda
Hey ya'll

Need some advice from the experts. I am not able to decide between between a 2007-8 CR-V or a 2007-8 honda accord LX.
One of my main criteria is a comfortable 3 seater at the rear ( carseat + 2 people )..

From the feedback it looks like CR-V is a bit scrunched at the back and a Accord would be more comfortable at the rear.

All the tire and other problems with the CR-V is also scaring me a bit.....but I love the CR-V :-(

Not sure what to go for. ( For purely size reasons, I have also considered an nissan xterra or rouge ..but dont know how they would compare to CR-V)..

any help in making a decsion appreciated !!
Comfort and safety are primary..



  • The CR-V is a fairly slow vehicle (0-60). That turned me off back in 2008 - I bought a 2008 Accord sedan with the V6 (and the VCM not so good vibrations). The Accord LX four cylinder doesn't have VCM, and is still a decent performer on acceleration. But some complain about the headlights on the four cylinder dimming enough when the AC clutches in, that other people think they are flashing the headlights at them. I put Phillips Extreme bulbs in the low beams on my car, as the factory low beams were so bad I wanted a flashlight to see where I was going on a wet moonless night.

    Had an Accord LX as a loaner when mine was in the dealer shop, and compared to the EX-L V6 Navi of mine, it personified 'rental car'.

    The CR-V offers the four wheel drive for bad weather.

    I'm sure you're reading the reviews, from Consumer Reports, and other magazines. Which can help with making a decision. Especially the reliability ratings that show problem areas (such as the rear brakes on the Accords).
  • bernieismycatbernieismycat Posts: 3
    edited September 2010
    I just traded in my 2005 Accord V6 for a 2010 CR-V EX-L FWD, so I am at least partially qualified to answer your question.

    My main motivation for getting a new car was to gain extra cargo room for our 50 pound Labrador Retriever. I really love the flexible rear seat configuration of the CR-V. I find the CR-V's rear seats very comfortable, as long as there isn't a full-grown human in the middle rear seat. The rear seats slide forward and back, and when fully back, there is lots of leg room.

    You don't mention your cargo capacity needs. If they are modest, then I think the Accord will provide a more comfortable driving experience. But if you need the extra room, then get the CR-V. The compromises you need to make for the extra room aren't too bad at all.

    My main issues with the CR-V relative to the Accord are:
    - Slightly lower milage
    - More road and engine noise
    - Rough idle when the A/C is on
    - I miss the power of the V6, but if you are considering Accord LX, this isn't an issue for you.

    Hope that helps...
  • ktnrktnr Posts: 255
    Hmmm...I'm looking at trading in a 2005 Accord LX-V6 for a 2011 CR-V SE. I'm mainly interested in getting a taller ride-height (for a better view of traffic) and also improved cargo capacity. But I also spend about 15 hours a week commuting in my auto. I'm mostly worried about just what bernieismycat pointed out - more engine and road noise, rough idle with 4-cyl and missing the beautifully smooth and powerful V-6. Dealer quoted me just over $16k difference out the door with 1.9% APR 60-months financing.

    So, with the CR-V, it's nicer and newer but I'm having trouble wrapping my head around paying $16k for less MPG and more noise. I'm not in a position to NEED a new car - my Accord is fine at 84K miles with recent brakes and new tires.

    Comments? Advice?
  • amazonamazon Posts: 293
    Ride, Performance, Handling, Fuel Economy- Advantage Accord
    Cargo, Image, (maybe) Seating Position - Advantage CRV
  • Hi ktnr. You might want to also look at Acura RDX. It's a lot quicker and quieter than the CR-V. I test-drove one when I got my CR-V and it was a close call. My main problem with the RDX was the the rear seats didn''t adjust or "tumble" forward like on the CR-V.
  • ktnrktnr Posts: 255
    Fold flat rear seats in the RDX vs tumble forward seats on the CR-V was a problem? Personally, my problem would be the 5-year True-Cost-to-Own of $47,027 on the RDX vs $31,519 on the CR-V (and only $27,185 for my current 2005 Accord LX-V6).

    Premium fuel for the turbo at EPA estimated 19/24mpg on the RDX doesn't look so hot either compared to regular fuel at 21/28mpg on the CR-V (21/30mpg on my 3.0L Accord V-6).

    Though I adored the last-gen Acura TL, I could never get past the notion that it was mechanically very similar to the Accord V-6 yet cost half again as much money (mostly for sharper creases in the sheet metal ?).
  • ktnrktnr Posts: 255
    I've been thinking about this a lot over the past couple of days. I guess I'd put it like this:

    Cost & V-6 smoothness/performance - advantage 7th-gen Accord.

    Seating, cargo, Aux-In audio input, programmable door locks, upholstery, maintenance minder, dynamic MPG display, TPMS, new-car smell - advantage 3rd-gen CR-V.

    It might sound silly but I've always liked having a rear wiper too for some reason. I looked at the CR-V back in 2004 and it was too much of an economy-car design at the time. If the 3rd-gen CR-V had been out then, I probably would have bought one.
  • blufz1blufz1 Posts: 2,045
    edited March 2011
    16k for what! Keep your Accord. The fewer cars and divorces you have,the better off you are.
  • autowriteautowrite Posts: 226
    If I was buying a new CR-V today what would be the most reliable model? AWD of FWD?
    I currently own a 2002 Odyssey
  • The engineer in me will say that reliability is a function of the number of things that could fail. With AWD you have the additional rear-wheel drive unit. So mathematically the more reliable CR-V would be FWD vehicle.

    The real determinator is do you live in snow country? and would you be driving the vehicle in the snow or staying home? I live in the St. Louis, MO area where it snows a fair amount and also we live in the country where the roads only get a second-rate job of snow removal. My wife decided that so long as she was buying an SUV-like vehicle she might as well get one that would have a lesser chance of finding the ditch beside the road.
  • toledo73toledo73 Posts: 131
    The 2012 CRV is due out in July. This is a complete redesign and you may want to wait. I now own a 2010 highlander v6, very smooth and comfortable. I owned a CRV before this SUV and I loved it. The seating and height was perfect for me. With my back issues, I can no longer " fall in to" an automobile. I am spoiled by both the CRV and Highlanders egress. You basically slide in to them. Frankly I would wait for the 2012 CRV. Also the Toyota RAV 4 will be re-designed for 2012. Not sure of release date.
  • kdizzleskdizzles Posts: 1
    edited December 2012
    Hi There,

    I am debating between a 2013 CRV and 2013 Accord. I previously leased a 2007 Accord and then upgraded to the 2010. My lease is almost up and I am going to buy a car this time around but am a little torn on which to pick. I've already test driven both- but I think I will return for another test drive as I'm so undecided.

    I am really petite at 4'9" and I have a big dog (80lbs) so please consider that as well. I am in my early 20s so I am not concerned about child-rearing just yet. It seems all reviews concerning the Accord and the CRV bring up the fact that it's easier to load children into a CRV- but kids are the farthest thing from my mind right now! :P Also re-sale value- which car really bring the most for its buck?

    What I like about the Accord:
    - The gas mileage. I drive about 200 miles a week so gas consumption is an issue for me. I do NOT want a Fit.
    - The drive on the 2013 was incredibly smooth, and I could immediately tell the difference from my current Accord. I am thinking that with my bad driving- the Accord might be better for turning as well?
    - The dashboard was nicer than the CRV. The screen was bigger and the plastic just felt of higher quality.

    What I like about the CRV:
    - The higher seat for driving. I am 4'9" so sitting up higher is a really big plus for me.
    - The bigger size. I feel more safe in the CRV, is this a valid claim?
    - The seating was more comfortable in the CRV- I tested the standards in both the Accord and the CRV. I liked the armrest. I wouldn't want to base my decision on an arm rest- but I really liked that it felt more at home in the CRV.

    Please let me know your suggestions as to whether an Accord or CRV would be more preferable for me?
  • temj12temj12 Posts: 450
    When I read your post, you have decided. The CR-V is your choice. I have not owned one, but the case you make for it makes sense to me. You mention the armrest as not being that significant, but little things make a difference when driving. With your height, the CR-V makes the most sense. In my opinion, go with the comfort and not the better visual.
  • oldbearcatoldbearcat WVPosts: 197
    I own a 2010 CRV LX - which essentally has the same drivetrain as the 2013. My CRV currently has 81,000 miles on it, because I use it for business travel. My biggest disappointment with it is it does not delver very good fuel economy running interstate speeds and is a bit underpowered. I travel hilly interstates a lot, and, the CRV downshifts a lot trying to hold interstate speeds on even very modest grades. My other little SUV has a V6 under the hood, lots more power, and gets the same fuel economy as my CRV does on trips.

Sign In or Register to comment.