Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Tell all your reliability stories to my neighbor who's CRV was in the shop for 3 days..."
Yeah, well my brother's escort blew up the engine on him some years ago, does that mean ALL Fords are bad products?
As I said before, this isn't about your neighbor or a bunch of guys posting on the internet. It's about the overall product. Show me numbers (percentages) that prove FORD to be more reliable than Honda OVERALL. It's just a weak arguement.
Is that the only way the rear seats fold in the new CR-V? There were enough other little quirks that kept us from buying one, and I think if I would have gone as far as to fold the rear seats, (up instead of down I guess you could say) I would have slapped the salesman for trying to sell it to me. That looks like the folding process of a minivan seat which I've always found usesless because something ends up getting in the way. You'd think they could have come up with something ingenious like the "hidden" rear seat in the Odyssey that everyone is being quick to copy now.
varmint,
Going back to another post, you said that you have hauled 9-10 foot boards in your CR-V with the front and rear seat backs reclined. The video showed the rear seats reclining a couple of inches (the Escape rear seat backs do the same exact thing by the way) but not all the way to the floor. If the rear seat back doesn't recline flat to the floor, then it's hardly a unique "bed" feature, as the same thing can be done in the Escape/Tribute (although I'd still rather put extra long items on the roof if I can). If the rear seat back does recline flat to the floor, then just forget everything I've said above.
The FRONT seats tip back to form a mini-bed type thing but I think you would have to be seriously drunk to consider sleeping in there. The older 'V' seats folded down flat, so I'm sure that's how Varmint got the space he needed.
As Freeber pointed out, the old CR-V allowed the rear seat back to fold (almost) flat with the floor. This pic of the Element shows how it works. Sorry, right now I don't have access to the pics of my CR-V doing the same trick. I freely admit, the Element does it better.
The 2002 CR-V does the same thing, though the rear seat back only folds back to about 45 degrees. Like I wrote before, it's more like a lounge chair, than a true bed. However, it can still be used to haul long items. I've also used this configuration to tote my sister around when she had her leg in a cast. The CR-V was the only vehicle she fit into.
I suppose if the Escape allows the front seat to fold back all the way, then you could do something similar. However, the headrests on the Escape are "fixed" and cannot be removed. So I have doubts that you can get the front seat back to meet with the rear seat cushion.
Yet another possibility is how the VUE does this. The front seat folds forward (to the dash) and allows long items to run through the cargo area and over the flat backside of the front seat. Once again, I suspect the Escape's fixed headrest prevents this from working out.
The flip/fold rear seats in the CR-V are one of the features that owners and reviewers have raved about. There is no need to remove and store the headrests. It's simple to do. And it also allowed the cargo floor to be lowered four inches as compared to the original design. If they chose to have it disappear into the floor, then the floor would have to be considerably higher.
I agree without you both about the roof rack, though. The design stinks almost as badly as the RAV4s. The orignal design was much better. The only good part about it is the fact that the rails are standard. You're not required to purchase the cross bars.
We happen to have the leather seats, so I don't really have any desire to slide large objects across them, but if I do have to keep something from getting wet on the roof it's nice to know of another optional seating configuration.
Yes, I was under the assumption that you had a 2002. I'll have to check this out in my brother-in-law's 2001 SE to see what the difference is.
By the way, I don't care what the Element can or can't do, it will never see garage time at our house. I guess that's for another board though.
Thanks much,
Jeannine Fallon
PR Director
Edmunds.com
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
All said I think both vehicles are probably great for certain people. In my opinion I opt for the CRV because of the reliability issues, mileage, and emmision concerns.
We battle back and forth on these boards about who's vehicle is better, and it's a lot of fun sometimes. And, yes there is data out there that leads us to believe all Honda's are less prone to ending up in an early grave. Maybe they really are, but you are still risking an early loss with one, even if it is in fact a smaller risk.
So if anyone actually reads this board for advice on whether or not to purchase an Escape or CR-V any more, please don't be discouraged by all of our constant bickering, that's what car guys/gals do. Some good comparisons have been made here, but the only information that you should trust is that which comes from deep inside your head during all of those test drives.
(Steps off soap box:) Sorry for that little speech. I stayed up to watch ER last night and I think I have some permanent emotional damage after watching Dr. Green leave the show for the third time in as many episodes. I think I need to get out some more.
That said, Honda is better.
=P Just kidding everyone, take a breath....
Regarding reliability... I can see how it wouldn't be a factor for someone who knows cars. If you have a problem, you know it. And you probably know big a deal it is. You and I can make a reasonable decision about repairs without trusting the dealer (or any other mechanic) not to rip us off. However, most people are clueless about cars. Especially with all the high tech sensors, valve timing, etc. College kids, single moms, or others who know nothing about cars need something that is less likely to break down and less likely to surprize them with high cost repairs.
Hence, we hedge our bets with the manufacturers that have the better record.
BTW, I used the Element only to show how the seats fold. I have pics of the CR-V, but they're not "handy" at the moment.
Daveghh - I saw that too. I figured we should settle the cargo/passenger space issues (then the emissions issue) before moving on to crash tests.
Pic 1
Pic 2
Here's a pic of how the new CR-V does the same trick. Definately not as flat as the old model, but still workable.
pic 3
When you look at these vehicles from an engineering point of view, which I am in graduate school for, I notice the quality of vehicles. When you start a honda it just sounds better, feels better and all the parts are so integrated together. GM/Chevy lack that, and I think Ford does as well.
In other words, compare any Ford engine to a Honda engine the Honda is always smoother and quieter, no matter what comparison.
And based on the fact that I beat the V6 in my crv in 2 out of 3 mini-drag races and the fact that the crv sounds much quieter I have come to the simple conclusion: that most people subconsciencly think if the engine is louder it has more power. Case in point... the old V6 nissan Xterra, the V6 Escape.... etc... versus quiet higher horsepower engines...
Ground clearance is an old topic. Edmunds has posted the P205 XLS clearance not the XLT with the 235 tires.. Clearance is 8.5..
Once again a misinformed person.. the headrests do come out and the seats lay flat in the Ford Escape.
I too can haul 9ft pieces of pipe/or wood in my Escape..
About the emissions. don't forget you are comparing a 6cylinder to a 4cylinder. A 6 cylinder with 200HP and 200ft/lbs of torque to a 4cyl with 160hp and 161 ft/lbs of torque.. Lets put this into prospective here....
Your stories of your Honda beating a 6cyl Escape are a joke. its already been proven that the Escape is quicker... The 0-60 times are posted in comparisons around the net. Even your beloved CR rates the Escape at a quicker 0-60 time. Dave, I know a person who is a manager of a Honda dealership. We did our own 0-60 tests with an automatic CRV AND a 5spd CRV. The Escape won everytime... Granted, the CRV with a 5spd was MUCH quicker than the CRV with the automatic. The numbers just don't lie. 200HP/200 ft/lbs of torque vs 160HP/161ft/lbs of torque. The CRV has about a 160LB adavantage. When the 2002 CRV first came to market I brought my Escape to the Honda dealership. Myself and my friend and about 3-4 other people did a comparison of these two vehicles inside and out.
Don't forget, I own a Honda and two Fords. My other Ford that was supposed to fall apart at anytime according to some Toyota owners is still going strong at 67,000 miles... This is one reason why I just don't buy some of this Honda is perfect rhetoric...
plus, whereas the Escape has a $1000 discount.
So for the present the CRV is holding it's value
pretty good.If you are looking at selling in 4 years the CRV will retain more of it's value.I would have rather had an MDX but could not afford it.Hopefully in 4 years I will have enough value to trade up to it.
Final evaluation of my experience:
Noisy (but very powerful) engine at all speeds
Noisy suspension
Rattles everywhere (3000km's Canadian)!!
Terrible service
Very agressive vehicle
Transmission does not know what to do with the power
Can't wait to see the discussion you will have when the pilot blows away all other suv's in this class!!!! Watch your blood pressure!
why I did not choose the CRV.
Lack of power
Lack of towing ability
Styling is more for a woman
Funny looking frontend
noisy when pushed hard
Small, funny looking tires
Rear hatch opens to the street
hard seats
Varmit, You spoke of interior dimensions, the dimensions you wanted to bring forward. I asked that people please to go MSN and compare ALL the dimensions side by side.
Value.. You pay more at initial purchase.. I sure hope you get more at sale time..
The Pilot has a 240HP engine.. The Blazer/Envoy, and Explorer come with more powerful engine/transmission combinations.. Nice try...
The big lights in the front took a little getting used to, but they have really grown on me and I think the CRV is a pretty attractive vehicle, especially when I finish adding the accessoires I want on it. Thule racks, side steps, deflector, and foglights. When the escape first came out I thought it was an extremely attractive vehicle, but it quickly became bland to me. Just your standard shapes and curves, I think the Tribute looks more attractive.
If you compare the four cylinder escape to the four cylinder CRV you will find that the emmisions difference are pretty much the same with a pretty significant gap.
My experience with dragging the V6 is legit, and in my experience the crv won 2 out of three times. Maybe the one I raced was a defective, then that would just reinforce my belief that Fords are NOT reliable.
Scape2 - Exactly which dimensions am I missing? We compared volume, linear measures for both front and back seats, cargo volume, luggage volume, and even the entire length of the cockpit. Tell me, what am I missing?
Daveghh - Good point. If Scape's reasoning is that the Ford is dirtier because it's got a V6, then why is the weaker, smaller 4cyl just as dirty?
I agree on the styling, too. The Escape looks just like every other Ford. Not a bad thing, but not interesting either. There are things that I do and don't like about the new CR-V, too. IMHO, it's a wash.
UH OH the big bad Blue Oval isn't going anywhere.
From the business section:
Ford is on track to MEET Or BEAT its goal of breaking even this year and expects to record a profit for the second quarter. The forecast is also a 6.5 INCREASE in sales this year. Looks like Ford Motor Company is back on track. Not too bad for a company that is supposed to make unreliable, low quality vehicles..
Dave, we have argued this 0-60 issue over and over.. The numbers don't add up AND go see the 0-60 times yourself at CR, motor Trend.. you find them...
Looking through the new car ads today.. 2002 XLT v6 Escape 19,975.. CRV LX 19,988.. Where is the value??
Heck, often it varies depending on the individual salesperson your working with, and how motivated they are in their job..
In my particular area I've had better sales experiences at the Ford dealerships than at Chevy/Dodge and Honda.. Based on knowledgable staff, approachable, integrity and gamesmanship.
Another thing that can be more difficult when buying Honda vehicles is that there are no 'factory' options, only dealer options.. It is more difficult find the cost of the 'dealer' options. If you want the vehicle exactly as it came from the factory, then your fine there are alot of sources that can give you the dealer costs.
I've seen no source that shows the Escapes resale value being 'quite a bit lower' in your words.. On the contrary, I've found sources (which are pretty much industry standards) that dispute this claim.
We have compared 0-60 times (to death). The CR-V MT scores are 8.4, 8.5, and 8.8. Escape scores range from low 8's to low 9's. Meanwhile the CR-V AT scores in the high 8's to mid 9's. Slower than the Escape, but not by much. In fact, a recent test has the CR-V AT out-running the Escape in a head to head comparison.
I agree that the numbers do not add up. And so I ask, "why is the Escape so darn pokey?"
Bess - You're comparing a 2001 model (mechanically the same as my '99) to a relatively brand new design. Value of older models generally take a sharp dive when a new generation is introduced.
Edmunds lists "estimated" depreciation for both 2002 models. That category was the single largest difference in their TCO comparison. While I think you were correct in debunking the data provided by IntelliChoice, I don't recall finding flaw with the depreciation numbers provided by Edmunds.
Lets compare apples to apples here. Of course a V6 is going to have more power and thus more towing. If a 6 were available in the 'V', Ford would be posting much larger incentives than they are now. (Note, the V6 gives 41 more horses and 34 Ft-lbs more torque)
Ford 4 Cyl.:
127 HP @5400 RPM with 135 Ft-lbs of Torque @ 4500
Honda 4 Cyl.:
160 HP @6000 RPM with 162 Ft-lbs of Torque @ 3600
- Lack of towing ability
This is just a plain odd arguement to me. If you have something that large or heavy to tow, why don't you buy a comparable size vehicle? "Hey look at that 35' yacht behind that 11' vehicle!!" That aside, if we stick to apples again.....
Ford 4Cyl.:
1000 Lbs.
Honda 4Cyl.:
1500 Lbs.
-Styling is more for a woman
Way to insult all the women here!! I have several points on this one. First, the CRV styling is more "EURO", which tends to be associated with higher class vehicles and manufacturers from Europe. The look tends not to attract people covering insecurities up with "Manly" looking vehicles. Second, was it the CRV or the Escape that had Captain Geek drooling over a Ford Escape driven by 2 ladies? ('Nice Escape') What exactly is FORD's demographic there, hmmm? Lastly, even if the styling IS more designed for a woman (I haven't seen any market research saying it is or isn't), so what? Because I drive a CRV I'm feminine by nature? Did it ever strike you that maybe there are some women out there that prefer a more 'masculine' look in their vehicle? Inflating the your list of complaints with pointless arguements such as this only take away from your stance.
-Funny looking frontend
See above.
-noisy when pushed hard
and the Escape or ANY other is quite when the pedal is tromped on? From reading earlier posts, I get the impression the Escape is noisy at all speeds, not just when 'pushed hard'. That said, my 'V' has more road noise transmitted than my Blazer, but they aren't the same type of vehicle.
-Small, funny looking tires
I can't really argue this one, though again that's just a cosmetic issue that can be changed by any owner. I've seen ugly tires on many vehicles.
-Rear hatch opens to the street
Again, this one I can't argue other than with this style of door you aren't gonna be able to open in on the street anyhow. Most likely the person behind you parked too close. You CAN still get through the glass though.
-hard seats
I don't think they are that hard, but I prefer a seat that you don't mush around in when turning corners. For an example of a REALLY bad seat, look at the older Toyota 4Runner seats. Those are just horrible.
As far as dimensions go...try cut and paste man. From Edmunds:
Ford Escape:
Exterior:
Length: 173 in.
Width: 70.1 in.
Height: 69.1 in.
Weight: 3238 lbs.
Wheel Base: 103.1 in.
Ground Clearance: 7.8 in.
Interior:
Front Head Room: 40.4 in.
Front Hip Room: 53.4 in.
Front Shoulder Room: 56.3 in.
Rear Head Room: 39.2 in.
Rear Shoulder Room: 55.9 in.
Rear Hip Room: 49 in.
Front Leg Room: 41.6 in.
Rear Leg Room: 36.4 in.
Luggage Capacity: 33 cu. ft.
Maximum Cargo Capacity: 65 cu. ft.
Maximum Seating: 5
Honda CRV:
Exterior:
Length: 178.6 in.
Width: 70.2 in.
Height: 66.2 in.
Weight: 3258 lbs.
Wheel Base: 103.1 in.
Ground Clearance: 8.1 in.
Interior:
Front Head Room: 40.9 in.
Front Hip Room: 54.5 in.
Front Shoulder Room: 56.9 in.
Rear Head Room: 39.1 in.
Rear Shoulder Room: 56.5 in.
Rear Hip Room: 53.5 in.
Front Leg Room: 41.3 in.
Rear Leg Room: 39.4 in.
Luggage Capacity: 33.5 cu. ft.
Maximum Cargo Capacity: 72 cu. ft.
Maximum Seating: 5
The Escape is taller, lighter, has more rear headroom, and more front leg room. CRV wins every other one of those. (comparison based on Escape XLS Value 4WD 4dr SUV (2.0L 4cyl 5M) and CRV LX AWD 4dr SUV (2.4L 4cyl 5M, both low end models as near as I can tell)
FFT
#1) The CRV tires are significantly smaller then the Escape. This makes a huge difference with acceleration and mileage!
#2.) Aerodynamics or otherwise known as drag coefficient is significantly lower for the CRV. Don't believe this is important? Stick your hand out the window going sixty miles an hour!
#3) The CRV weighs less, not by much, so this probably isn't a very important variable to look at.
#4.) Gear Ratios, don't know much about this so I am not sure which one has the benefit for this category.
The first two that I mentioned have a HUGE affect on the acceleration of a vehicle. Tire size significantly affects 0-60 times at all speeds where the drag coefficent only effects higher speeds.
Bess, I will try to find the resale value for both vehicles. No, two vehicles one year old based on the same starting cost will be significantly different after one year. The typical accepted resale values are used for 3 years and 5 years.
the reason why we were comparing the v6 is because there were some where were discounting the superiority of the V6 over the 4cyl in the CRV. Not just towing advantage, there is passing advantage, merging advantage. Along with the ability to keep up your speed when climbing mountain passes. Do the math.. The CRv has about 150lb advantge. 160HP/162ft/lbs of torque vs 200HP/201ft/lbs of torque... Hmmmm... As I have said over and over.. Even the magazine Honda owners love to quote.. Consumer Reports ... rates the Escape at 8.5 0-60 times, Motor Trend is another.. About 20 percent of Escapes sold are with the 4cyl model. I cannot argue the 4cyl vs 4cyl battle. However a 4cyl Escape is quite a bit less than a comparable CRV. A new 2.3 is going to be available in what is rumored to be the 2003 model. I have not been able to pin down exact HP/Torque ratings.. Hp anywhere from 145-155 torque from 147-153..
Euro-look for the CRV? please.. doesn't this hurt your stance? Styling is a no brianer here.. The Escape looks better to the majority of people.
read any review of the Escape and styling are high points with the Escape.
The rear hatch is a joke on the CRV. Opening to the street makes no sense, how are you going to open this if a car is behind you? And you have to go around the gate too...
Tires are cosmentic.. then why didn't Honda put 16" wheels and tires on in the first place? Can you say reduced MPG?
the 2.4 is buzzy when pushed hard.. and you have to push it hard in order to atain the 0-60 numbers to match the V6 in the Escape.
Demographics do show more woman buy CRV's.. I'll try to find the link..
The v6 escape is much louder at all speeds over the CRV. Check the decibals!!!
The CRV back door is a pain if you live on a street where you parrallel park everyday. If that isn't you then this can be ignored.
Check the TCO (total cost to own) on this Edmunds site and you will see it costs 2 to 4 grand more to own an escape over 5 years compared to the crv!!! So your value arguement isn't substantial.
www.edmunds.com/new/2002/honda/crv/lxawd4drsuv24l4cyl4a/tco.html?id=lin0006&zip=04930
Then click on compare similiar vehicles!
Make sure you check out the resale of the Tribute which has almost the same starting cost. Better yet check out the resale of the 23 grand Escape at the end of five years versus the cheaper 21 grand CRV. That IS a Significant difference!!!
Starting cost 2002 CRV: $21,381
end of 5 years: $10,215
Starting cost of 2002 Escape: $23,274
end of five years: $8,906
The 23 grand escape is worth has a lower value then the CRV which had the initial lower value!!!
Looks of the vehicles are SUBJECTIVE, so we can argue that all day and not get anywhere. I personally think the CRV is more stylish then the typical bland curving of the Escape. I do think the Tribute is quite attractive though.
-Regardless, I think Scape2 was only voicing his personal opinion (his tastes).
I agree, but he's using that personal opinion in an arguement on overall quality.
-For example: I think that the new RAV4 looks "remote controlled". This does not mean that Toyota was trying to market them as a common Christmas present for young children.
I disagree. Was it the RAV4 that had the TV commercial showing it wrapped up in a giant box with a bow on it for Christmas in the toy store window? Even if it isn't, body styling has alot to do with not only areodynamics, but curb appeal too. The styling often plays on people emotions for sophistication or reverting back to their youth.
Scape2:
-..the rear leg room numbers taken with the seats fully in thier back position? Are the cargo area dimensions taken with the backseats fully in thier forward position?
I can't prove it, but I highly doubt when ANYBODY does dimensions they move the seats around in between. That's just ignorant because the dimensions would add up being more than the vehicle length.
-the reason why we were comparing the v6 is because there were some where were discounting the superiority of the V6 over the 4cyl in the CRV. Not just towing advantage, there is passing advantage......
Lets be clear, regardless of the weight difference and the fact that the Escape has a V6, the 'V' is faster or within tenths of seconds as fast (depending on who you want to listen to). I have no problems maintaing highway speed when climbing or passing. Does the engine work harder? Sure.
-Euro-look for the CRV? please.. doesn't this hurt your stance? Styling is a no brianer here.. The Escape looks better to the majority of people.
read any review of the Escape and styling are high points with the Escape.
That's not saying much.....
-The rear hatch is a joke on the CRV. Opening to the street makes no sense, how are you going to open this if a car is behind you? And you have to go around the gate too...
Hmmmm......did you not read what I said? I agree the gate is a poor design, but the glass gives you just as much accessibilty as the Escape in a parallel parking situation.
-Tires are cosmentic.. then why didn't Honda put 16" wheels and tires on in the first place? Can you say reduced MPG?
Can you say Ford could do the same? So Honda is more interested in MPG than big looking tires. What's your point?
-the 2.4 is buzzy when pushed hard.. and you have to push it hard in order to atain the 0-60 numbers to match the V6 in the Escape.
OK, are you suggesting you get the 0-60 numbers for the Escape under normal acceleration? C'mon....
-Demographics do show more woman buy CRV's.. I'll try to find the link..
Again, what's the point?
Anyone knows you don't pay full MSRP for a Ford.. but you will for a HOnda.
Why does Edmunds rate the CRV so Low? A 7 ouch!!
I live in a large NW city. Ford Escape XLT V6 4x4's can now be had for 19,970.. Anyone willing to pay 23K for an XLT V6 Escape is crazy! Unless its totally loaded with step bars, moonroof, leather, the works.. Edmunds pricing is way too high for my area. I paid 22,800 for an XLT V6 Escape about 9 months ago, I have every option but moonroof. You can find Escapes optioned like mine for less now..
Honda dealers are known for not dealing. They advertise a price and you pay it or too bad move on..
Compare Edmunds resale value of a 2001 XLT V6 Escape in the cost to own and then punch the numbers on the TMV. Don't forget to add leather, step bars, 6cD changer, privacy glass, pwr seats.. Why aren't the numbers the same?
Trade in is 18,622
Private party is 20,000
Dealer retail is 22,631
I did the same for a 2001 CRV SE 4wd
Trade is 16,875
Private is 18,039
Dealer Retail is 20,049
These numbers don't match with Edmunds costs.. Hmm.... why?
Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
I've tried it and hated it so that is my opinion. When a vehicle breaks down 3 times in 2 days and costs 25$ in gas, then I know I made the right choice BUT do grow up a little cuz you are not going to win this argument!
"In my road test, I noticed better off-the-line responsiveness, mostly due to this engine's increased torque. Cruising down the freeway, the CR-V's engine settles down to relaxed and quiet engine speeds. At 100 km/h in fourth gear, the CR-V's engine is doing only 2,300 rpm, and at 120 km/h it's just 2,800 rpm... Despite a high redline of 6,500 rpm, the CR-V's new 2.4 litre four cylinder engine is not noisy. In fact, I would say that the new CR-V is significantly quieter than the previous model. At idle, the engine is quiet and virtually vibration-free." - Canadian Driver Greg Wilson
"From a stop light or powering up the Gatineau Hills, the new engine pulls strong and smooth, meaning less need to downshift for manual transmissions and less hunting for the right gear with an automatic." - Canadian Driver Grant Yoxon.
"It thinks it's a V-6" - TruckTrend Jan/Feb Anniversary issue.
"It's now among the largest of modern four-bangers and possessed of a reciprocating mass commonly known to do three things: (1) shake the car on startup, when one of those largish slugs fails briefly to fire; (2) shake the car at idle, especially with the air-conditioning compressor at max drag; and (3) shake the car at all other times...Honda has somehow avoided all three" - C&D John Phillips
"...Honda's motor is absolutely fluid right up to redline, a true rarity in the land of SUVs, where ancient pushrod engine designs still seem to hold sway." Forbes.com Michael Frank
"To fight any vibration invited aboard by the long stroke and large displacement Honda has installed to counter-rotating balance shafts low in the block. Those balance shafts work wonderfully; this is a velvety engine with a broad VTEC-enhanced torque band." - The Car Connection
"Even without an available V6, the CR-V still offers plenty of get-up-and-go thanks to an all-new 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine....Rated at 160 horsepower and 162 pound-feet of torque, the larger four-cylinder might not seem like much of an improvement over the previous engine (146 horsepower/133 lb-ft of torque), but the seat-of-the-pants feel tells a different story. The large increase in torque makes for quick starts and a strong pull even when loaded down with additional passengers or cargo... Track testing confirmed our impressions, as the CR-V managed a best 0-to-60-mph run of 8.7 seconds. An impressive feat considering that the last Ford Escape we tested only managed a best time of 9.3 seconds, and that was with a 200-horsepower V6 under the hood. Not to mention that even with all this power, the CR-V still managed a very respectable 21.8 miles per gallon during our week-long test....Even more impressive than the engine's power is the manner in which it's delivered. Most four-cylinders are plagued by excessive noise and vibration, but the CR-V's new powerplant remains smooth and quiet at all engine speeds. It's also less peaky, with a broad band of power that rarely leaves you scrambling for a lower gear. We have no trouble calling this new engine the standard for refinement in four-cylinder sport-utes." - Edmunds.com Ed Hellwig
Now, to be fair, none of the reviews I've ever read say that the Escape in underpowered. There's no doubt that it is a very capable engine when you put your foot to the floor. However, there is certainly debate about how civilized it is. Here are some comments about the Escape's V-6 from the same sources.
"The engine does get a little noisy, though, when it's being taxed, like on a steep grade." - Edmunds
"From a standing start, the Escape's acceleration is brisk but rather noisy - a combination of engine noise, vibration and the sound of rushing air from the engine fan makes the Escape sound 'trucky'" - Canadian Driver
"The V-6 is strong, but a little buzzy at high rpm" - TruckTrend
My experience was a bad one as I previously mentioned BUT I do have a hard time believing that the CRV beat the Escape in acceleration as I thought the V6 was very powerful especially in midrange tourque. It was slow off the line and that may be the difference but caught up at around 4000 rpm. Still don't like this vehicle because I think as a daily driver it is noisy and agressive and seemed cheap. The only reason I rented one was to satisfy my "need to know" because the girl I work with owns a Tribute and even though she has had problems, thinks it is a good car........I however, disagree which is my right. I liked the Explorer much better (even though in a different class)much more refined BUT compared to what? The Pilot will make a mochery of it.
I like to look underneath a vehicle as well for quality and if you compare the CRV to the Escape, you will notice a big difference.....have a look.