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 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
Link: http://www.edmunds.com/apps/nvc/edmunds/VehicleComparison;jsessionid=DPZ1F2HRB191tDWl172p1- - - hTqS2LjXJVG507hnpyNrlyt1CLGwJfV!-1647092315?styleid=100474928&styleid=100376000&maxvehicle- - - s=5&refid=&op=3&tab=specs
"4) Far superior MPG? 2-3MPG is far superior?? You downplay the average of the Escape into your favor claiming "average Escape owners get 20MPG" How do you know this? I have averaged 23 on Hwy trips and 20 around town."
05' CRV EX (auto) vs. Escape XLT (Auto)
CRV: 22 (city) 27 (hw)
Escape: 18 (city) 22 (hw)
"I have been able to put the CRV through "real world" comparisons of my own. To completly dismiss the 40HP and 40ft/lbs of torque advantage is ignorant."
CRV weight: 3472lbs
Escape weight: 3464 lbs
CRV performance (I4 160hp, 162lb/ft):
- 0-60 - 8.7 seconds
- 1/4 mile - 16.5 sec@83mph
Escape Performance (V6 200hp, 193lb/ft)::
- 0-60 - 9.3 seconds 10.6 per M/T
- 1/4 mile - 16.9 sec@82mph
Dismissed.
Just want to make sure you're comparing apples to apples.
They must have been oompa loompas, then... :P
2)It does matter how 0-60 times were taken. A 5spd manual gear box allows you to redline an engine and shift faster than an Automatic. I guess you don't know I have access to CRV's through a manager of a Honda dealership. Be careful of what you claim. I have driven both the automatic and 5spd version of the CRV. I have been able to put the CRV through "real world" comparisons of my own. To completly dismiss the 40HP and 40ft/lbs of torque advantage is ignorant.
And as I've said before, achieving claimed 0-60 with an automatic requires powerbraking. So, what's the difference? 0-60 is 0-60. There are no stipulations on whether you redline it or not. That's absurd.
As far as your "comparison", what was the mileage on the Escape? And the CR-V? You realize, you must compare vehicles of equal stature. That means a broken-vehicle vs. a broken-in vehicle, and a new vehicle vs. a new vehicle. Besides, if you're comparing new vehicles, I'd like to have that dealerships number.
:shades:
3) When does the CRV reach its "Peek" HP/Torque rating and when does the Escape? Gee, how much more does the Escape have to give you before it reaches its "PEEK'?? Then why didn't you just buy a mini-van? or a station wagon instead of a CRV?
First, it's "peak", not "peek". Secondly, why didn't you buy a minivan or a station wagon? My answer is probably the same as yours.
4) Far superior MPG? 2-3MPG is far superior?? You downplay the average of the Escape into your favor claiming "average Escape owners get 20MPG" How do you know this? I have averaged 23 on Hwy trips and 20 around town. If you look in the CRV room right here at Edmunds there are CRV owners complaing about MPG and are not getting 23-25 you claim. Kind of funny how you know all these averages yet have no data to back your claim.
I took both an average of the EPA figures (23.5 for the CR-V, 20 for the Escape) and what I've seen on Edmunds from actual owners. I was actually being generous to the Escape.
5)In one paragraph you claim 0-60 numbers don't matter in these "cute utes". In this one you bring it up. Which is it? I notice you don't bring up MPG figures when you compare the 2.3 vs the 2.4? Why? Because there isn't any maybe? You make another statement " And since the Honda four cylinder has been called the most technologically advanced mass-produced four cylinder" Where does it say this? Show me where? This is your OPINION
There really isn't any comparison between the Honda four and the Ford four, other than size and MPG. The Honda is far more powerful in everyday driving, the track, and everywhere else you put it.
You still have not explained why the HP in the CRV has dropped to 156? An oompa loompa stole those four horsepower.
or why Honda puts a V6 in the Accord? The market demands it.
or why Honda puts a V6 in the Oddessy? The market demands it.
if thier 4cyl engines are so advanced?? You even say yourself "And since the Honda four cylinder has been called the most technologically advanced mass-produced four cylinder"
The Escape is more of an SUV than the CRV just admit it.. What was it you were saying about opinion???
You just don't understand what HP/Torque really are and how they are an advantage. I've already tried to explain what gearing and fatter HP/Torque curves do, but you don't seem up on the technical side of things.
You should have bought a station waggon, does the same thing the CRV does.... And perhaps you should have bought something besides a cute ute to do all your towing and people hauling. A minivan would have been better at it.
Now, I've answered all your questions. How 'bout telling me why I can't find one of them new fangled Dur-o-techs in an F150, Freestar, or Explorer if it's so dang powerful??? I've asked you at least four or five times.
Just want to make sure you're comparing apples to apples.
Why does that matter? You can't buy a manual V6 Escape. You can buy a manual Honda CR-V. If I say "meet me at the track", you don't say "I couldn't buy a manual"... You either show up or you don't. And if you do, you get beat. That's like saying someone with two legs is only faster than someone with a prostetic because the person has the prostetic. You've got what you got, and the CR-V has more.
That thing got a Duratec?
The Excursion uses a V10 Triton like most Ford trucks.
My guess is that it'd be hard to shoe horn a V10 into an Escape. You could probably go the other way, but lose the hauling or towing capacity the big truck owners want.
While we're beating the CR-V and Escape to death, better look over your shoulder - the Nitro, Mariner Hybrid, Torrent, revised RAV4, new Grand Vitara and some others that I'm forgetting are sneaking up fast in the small SUV category (CUVs?).
That group is all V6's except the Mariner but, being a hybrid, it has two engines. :-)
Steve, Host
The whole "If the 2.4 is so superior, why does Honda put a V6 in the Accord, Pilot, etc..." question is Ludicrous and as Drom mentioned, it got questioned over, and over, and over. I've shown the facts, the CRV equals, if not trumps the Escape with only an I4 under the hood. With MUCH better economy to boot! That IS superior engineering, something that Scape can't seem to grasp as he touts the superiority of the Escape (The whole "I am Honda's worst nightmare" mumbo jumbo)
"While we're beating the CR-V and Escape to death, better look over your shoulder - the Nitro, Mariner Hybrid, Torrent, revised RAV4, new Grand Vitara and some others that I'm forgetting are sneaking up fast in the small SUV category (CUVs?)."
- The Nitro is an HHR/PT type vehicle IMO. Not really the same market as the V
- The Mariner-h, like the Escape-h is impressive but you wanna talk about SLOW...
- The Torrent, a blatant rebadge of the Cheapuinox. A weak chinese 3.4 = Performance division?
- Revised RAV4, with a 268hp V6 and third row seating, it sounds like thwe RAV is about to jump ship to a whole different category... Forget the V, it might as well be pinned against the Pilot.
- The new Vitara, definitely a step up from the last one. Much more refined, smoother, exclusive engines over the Cheapuinox clones. This one is competition.
BUT, the current V has been around since 02' so 3 model years later, better competition has cropped up. What'll happen when the V gets redesigned for 07' with possibility of Hybrid or even diesel power? Even now, I think the current V is still a competent player in the market. As is the Escape IMO. :shades:
The horsepower in the CR-V has not changed. The method of measuring it changed. Manufacturors are not required to post the newer (lower) numbers until the motor is retested. So the Escape will have lower HP numbers when it is next tested.
Honda did not change the engine, but chose to use the newer HP rating.
CR-V = 34
Escape = 37
The CR-V is the best handling and parking vehicle I've ever owned. It turns in less space than my wife's Civic. Amazing.
The same issue with glass was noted with the 1997-2001 model CR-V.
And, as pointed out by a prior poster, when I described the limitations of the IIHS bumper bash, I was talking about the rear crash tests. The likelihood of someone losing control of their car, spinning around, and impacting a pole or wall at 5 mph is pretty insignificant.
Also, the test measures how expensive it is to fix the vehicle. It has nothing to do with the safety of the vehicle. A good vehicle sacrifices itself for the occupants. That's the premise behind crush zones. So the cost to fix a vehicle is not a good indicator for the safety of the same vehicle.
The IIHS bumper bash is a test of parking lot scenarios. And it is perfectly valid if you're talking about backing out of a parking space into a sign post or a wall. But it has nothing to do with auto accidents on the road.
Escape weight: 3464 lbs
Just an FYI.
You're quoting the base weight for a stripped V6 model Escape. Ford does not publish the weight of the vehicle once you add all the optional equipment and packages they offer. For instance, add a moonroof and you add between 40-60 lbs to the car. A CD changer with upgraded speakers will add as much as 10 lbs to the curb weight. Electronics actually weigh quite a bit.
Very true... but do you really want to add that much fuel to the fire?
As someone else mentioned, many of these new "small SUVs" are hardly small. A few years back, the Saturn VUE got bumped from the small SUV category into the midsize category by Car & Driver. It was essentially too big and too heavy. The Equinox is based on the same platform, but they extended the wheelbase. I think it has a wheelbase of about 112", which is 6" longer than a Pilot and about the same as a Ford Explorer. The Torrent is just a rebadged version of the 'Nox.
Even the CR-V has been labeled a mid-size vehicle by some industry rags (Edmunds for one). Because the EPA uses only interior volume to determine the class for a vehicle, the CR-V's 103 cu.ft. puts it right on the cusp between small and mid-size. Even though the weight, engine, general dimensions, and price fall within the range of a small SUV, it technically fits into the mid-size category.
So, the fact that many of these not-so-small small SUVs might need a V6 to motivate their bulky, made-in-MacDonalds chassis doesn't really surprise me. The fact that Honda can sell so many CR-Vs without a V6, and has managed to keep the vehicle's size competitive for the class really says a lot about that spunky 2.4L four banger.
Probably not; this discussion reminds me too much of I don't like SUVs, why do you?
as it is. :P
Steve, Host
:P
It matters because an ATX CR-V should be compared to an ATX Escape. Both with the largest engines possible. That's as apples to apples as we're going to get with these two. Boy did you twist that around! :confuse:
If I say "meet me at the track", you don't say "I couldn't buy a manual"... You either show up or you don't.
Oh I'll show up, but not in our Escape if you put it that way. Make sure your doors are bolted on tight. :P
You've got what you got, and the CR-V has more.
You might want to research the ratio of ATX CR-Vs vs MTX CR-Vs. I've seen it posted here in the past. Since the auto's are just about dead even, chances are I'm not going to be beat.
In fact, I can't think of a time when I've had our Escape above 4500 RPM so obviously racing or 0-60 times aren't a priority to me.
I think the point of bringing up the high peak power of the Escape was to make the point that the CR-V has more usable power lower in the range, not requiring revving to get a sizeable amount of torque and horsepower. This is due to the i-VTEC engine optimizing cam lobes and valve timing in order to keep the engine in the most efficient position possible while delivering the right amount of horsepower (that called for by the driver's foot).
The point (if this isn't your point drom, I apologize) is that the CR-V, while having less peak horsepower, makes a much better use of what it has, delivering more of it around the rpm range, helping keep those mileage numbers in the thick of the mid 20s in the process.
Also, I don't understand this obsession of comparing apples to apples. We are, after all, comparing a four cylinder, with more than a half liter less displacement, to a V6. If we were REALLY interested in comparing apples to apples, we'd be comparing four cylinders. However, due the Honda's high technological powerplant, we're comparing it to a bigger engine with more cylinders. I have no problem with that. Why, then, is it unfair to compare a manual to an automatic? Ford doesn't offer a manual with the V6, just as Honda doesn't offer a V6. Regardless, if you are comparing acceleration times, you choose the best configuration for each vehicle. In the Ford, it's an automatic V6. In the CR-V, it's the manual four cylinder. What am I missing here???
regarding engine power bands, the duratech has a wide powerband, so you don't need to floor it to get going, or pass, or whatever. that's why most owners will never see the power peak. there will be some that add cai's and cat backs to get more power.
just washed and waxed the wife's '04 black limited. sure looks 'perty.
So, if I offer $300. below dealer invoice, some dealer might sell me a car?
Dealer Holdback
From the article:
"Almost all dealerships consider holdback money "sacred" and are unwilling to share any portion of it with the consumer. Don't push the issue. Your best strategy is to avoid mentioning the holdback during negotiations."
I see you found the Honda CR-V: Prices Paid & Buying Experience discussion -- look for threads about "out the door" pricing techniques. No use spending a lot of time arguing about the line items if you can just focus on the final price.
Steve, Host
If you don't understand the speed benefits of an MTX vs an ATX (this is changing with the new breed of automatics though) then I can't help you understand the "obsession". Know this though, if the Escape V6 came with the option of an MTX, the CR-V wouldn't stand a chance. Unless Honda were to put a V6 with an MTX in the CR-V.
I'm not arguing that the CR-V isn't faster. However you do need to compare models that are as alike as possible. Especially on a thread such as this where people come to comparison shop. You telling them that the CR-V does 0-60 in 8.7 seconds, or whatever the number was for the MTX, is going to confuse them and that's what I was pointing out. 80-90% of CR-V buyers opt for the ATX, and probably don't even know an MTX is an option for that matter, so they want to see how the one they are looking at stacks up against another make/model with the same equipment.
You keep telling us how the I4 in the CR-V is soooo V6-like, so why don't you want to call it an apples to apples comparison then? :P
If Ford were to bolt a better automatic transmission onto the Escape we wouldn't be having this discussion. The one they put in it now, the CD4E, is pretty bad I'll admit. It's old and never was very good to begin with.
And when you do the apples to apples comparison, in addition to performance wins, the CR-V also comes out ahead in cost and features (showed it many times, look back at old posts).
Then you can't compare the two at all if you want to put it that way. BTW, the CR-V also has a 5-speed ATX as opposed to the Escape's 4-speed. It's still the best each has to offer, and representative of the majority of each sold. All too often we see the Escape I4 compared to the CR-V for one thing like fuel economy and then the same person will compare the V6 to the CR-V for something like acceleration. Pick one and stick with it. I'd rather hear about what you have compared to what I have, which will benefit thread visitors more, rather than a bunch of numbers that mean nothing to most people buying these things.
And when you do the apples to apples comparison, in addition to performance wins, the CR-V also comes out ahead in cost and features
I've been here for nearly four years now so no, I'm not going back. Anything you want to ask me? :P
I don't particularly care but I'm not so sure about that statement. When I price compare an Escape XLS with
MTX and a CR-V LX with MTX they are priced within hundreds of each other (according to Edmunds TMV report). Both were loaded and are very similar in content.
We agree on at least one thing! :P I see this done all the time. However, with Honda's, they only offer more than one engine on two vehicles, the Accord and the Civic, so they don't have the luxury of doing this.
BTW, I got 25.3 mpg on my last tank with my CR-V, which has 4000 miles. Almost all of it was highway, but almost a quarter of it was at 80 mph, half with the air on, another quarter was at 70 mph, again, half with the air on, and the rest was at about 62 mph, again, half with the air on. Not too shabby!
Right! Which is why I'm telling you guys that if you want to compare the CR-V to the Escape you have to make some compromises. Yes the Escape has a V6 as it's top engine while the CR-V only has an I4. But the CR-V has a 5-speed ATX whereas the Escape's is a very old and inefficient 4-speed. That is as close as you are going to get to an "apples to apples" with these two. Period. Factor in all of the other options and you have to compare those two together as the CR-V SE does not come with an MTX IIRC.
We consistently get 23-25 MPG on the highway, depending on the terrain, with the A/C on and at least three people and their gear in our Escape. That's for all highway. All city is an average of about 18-19 MPG. I can live with that, but I think an Explorer is about as low as I'd go regarding fuel economy. Cars are a different story because an 8 MPG Ferrari sounds pretty good to me!
What kind of mileage does the Explorer get? Which year/model/trim and powertrain combo do you have (hope you dont mind me asking, and if you do, never mind)? I like the size and price that comes with the explorer, but paying the gas bill scares me a little. I have an idea of where the explorer stickers on EPA numbers, but was curious of real-world driving. Thanks for your help!
grad
Glad you've been here 4 years. Still doesn't make many of your statements correct.
A CR-V comparably equipped to an Escape costs less. And has performance advantages too.
Hopefully that statement will benefit thread visitors the most.
It did not have a moonroof and neither did the CR-V. The Escape had alloy wheels but the CR-V didn't.
Take a look back at my post and read it again. This time notice which trims I compared.
Glad you've been here 4 years. Still doesn't make many of your statements correct.
So which school of perfection did you attend again? I just want to make sure I don't send my kids there. :P
I do research everything I can before posting, you can be sure of that. When I state my opinion it is just that. If you don't like it then ignore it and move on. I'd extend the same courtesy to you.
A CR-V comparably equipped to an Escape costs less. And has performance advantages too.
Actually it has very little benefit because you don't specify the performance advantage it holds over the Escape which boils down to 0-60 times. The Escape has consistently beat the CR-V in slalom and skidpad scored as well as the 1/4 mile. It also holds a performance advatage in towing and braking. All of this info is admittedly based on tests done 2 or 3 years ago but I haven't seen the two pitted against each other since then. If you have, then I think it would BENEFIT all of us to see what you've got. Consider this a pop quiz of sorts.
I don't actually have an Explorer so I can't really give you any hard numbers. Most of what I've heard, from friends and family who have them, is that the numbers stay pretty close to the EPA ratings. My father-in-law put 45,000 mostly highway miles on his 2002 Eddie Bauer V6 and averaged 19 MPG. He now has a new 2006 Eddie Bauer V8 and I don't know what he's averaging yet. Supposedly the MY06 Explorers are a bit more efficient than the older models so we'll see. Plus the V8 is a slightly de-tuned Mustang V8 so who cares what mileage it gets! :surprise:
A friend of mine had a 2002 XLT V8 and averaged 16 MPG in mixed city/highway. He found a loaded to the gills 2004 TrailBlazer I6 for less money per month and dumped the Explorer simply to save money. Don't know what kind of mileage he's getting on that thing yet either.
Sorry if I mislead you but hopefully what I had helps.
As for the Escape outperforming the CR-V, unfortunatley I threw out the Consumer Reports where it talks about the Escape's brakes being horrible (and that was the current model) but I posted about it here so feel free to look up the post. CR recently reviewed small SUVs and the CR-V finished second while the Escape finished seventh. To many here that means nothing, to me it speaks volumes.
That fact underscores what I believe is one of the CR-V's strengths. There are very few compromises. You can have your fuel economy and drag race, too. With the Escape, you pick one or the other. Something gets sacrificed.
About the most comparable Ford model for the CR-V is actually the Escape HEV. It gets good mileage (even better than the CR-V) and has acceleration about the same. The only problem with this comparison is the high price of the HEV.
Why does Edmunds have a Con in the CRV bracket as having no V6? if the 4cyl is so doggone superior to all V6's? CR has lost much of its past respect.. I don't trust a mag that also reviews toasters.. Plus right here at Edmunds posters have shown over and over how bias CR is against anything Detroit...
20, read them 20 reviews and the ranking is 9.1....
CRV has 1, 1 review and its a 10...
I sure wonder how 20 people can buy such an "inferior" vehicle, yet be quite satisified..
Also for 06 the HP is 156.. not 160..
Now, take and add about 600lbs to both vehicles, then do a 0-60 run.. then you will see the benefits of HP/Torque.. Now do you understand??
Also, you split your reply into about a 150 separate different messages, but NO where did I read the mileage on the CR-V and the Escape you supposedly "compared".
Finally, again, how often do you have your car revving at 4800, or better yet 6000 RPM?
Why didnt' you buy a station wagon or mini-van? I want to know. I didn't because I needed a bit of towing power, ability to visit my fishing spots, skii areas in the Cascade mountains too!, tow my 2 watercraft, camping gear ect. The CRV CAN NOT do this... However.. a station wagon and mini-van CAN do everything your CRV can do...
I can see you have left out what CRV owners have said in the CRV chat room about MPG..
Reason why you can't find a Duratec in an F150? or Freestar? Well, I guess Ford hasn't purchased the 2.4 yet from Honda.. Heck the 2.4 will save the world! Heck! I want to put a 2.4 in the Excursion! yeah, it will have awesome 0-60 times because of "Gearing", yeah gearing... Ever wonder why Toyota decided to put a V6 in the RAV4? MARKET DEMANDS IT.. someone said.... :shades:
The key word in that post is in your region. CR-Vs can be negotiated closer to invoice than you might believe in my region.
Honda dealeships don't deal....
Why is there a prices paid forum for Hondas then? If you will notice, many shoppers are getting great deals on Hondas these days, albeit not the employee pricing type of deal. My aunt bought a 2005 Odyssey EX in the fall of 2004, and paid $27,000 (MSRP in the mid $28s) and was given the max blue book trade in value for her car in "good" condition. Honda dealerships DO deal.
I recall that discussion but I'm not taking CR's test as gospel. May the Lord strike me down if I ever do! :surprise: When the '02 Escape was matched up against the '02 CR-V back in an '02 MT issue (I think I have the years right), the Escape stopped roughly 10 feet shorter IIRC. And that was with rear drums on the Escape. Now the Escape has discs all around as well as EBD so I don't see how it is worse.
Personally I have had one stand out experience where I had to "panic" stop. I've posted this before but without as much detail IIRC. Once on a highway on-ramp a deer was standing in the middle of the road just over the crest of the hill. By the time I saw it I was already doing 60 MPH because I was nearing the merge point, it was late at night, and no one was on the road. If I were to estimate, I'd say I was about 200 ft (less than one football field) away from the beast when I first saw it. I immediately hit my brakes, obviously after having traveled some distance more, thinking for sure I was going to hit it. About a second after I hit the brakes, the ABS already doing it's job, what I believe to be the EBD kicked in and I could actually feel the calipers grabbing harder at the rotors. I've never felt this before and was in complete shock when we stopped at least 20 feet from the deer who then proceeded to scamper off over the guide rail and into the brush.
Because of that experience, I have complete confidence in our Escape's brakes regardless of what CR published. Too many factors can have an affect on braking, like the seating of the pads, moisture in the air, road surface, etc. Since CR did not test these two vehicles on the same day, and for all we know different locations, I'm hard pressed to directly compare their numbers.
I better go back and give them a load of cash then! My salesperson forgot that when I bought my '05 SE for $404 UNDER invoice last July.
I wonder if they'll take a check?? Hmmm What to do, what to do...
Dude, this kind of babble does nothing for your credibility. Nobody said the 2.4l "will save the world"...
Your question that you posted 20 times in the past year has been "if the 4-cyl is so good, why is there a V6 for the Accord". You know what? Yes, it is THAT good.
"Ever wonder why Toyota decided to put a V6 in the RAV4? MARKET DEMANDS IT.. someone said...." There you go bubba, answered your own question. Only took you a year to figure it out...
Unfortunately, for you and your anti-Honda nonsense, you don't get it. That's fine, your loss. The response of why there is no 3.0l V6 for the F150, the freestar...the EXCURSION! was just a counterpoint to prove how silly your argument is. Don't hound people for not sharing your sentiment that a freakin V6 is the ONLY way to go for a small SUV! I posted the numbers straight from Edmunds.
Try reading the link this time:
http://www.edmunds.com/apps/nvc/edmunds/VehicleComparison;jsessionid=DPZ1F2HRB191tDWl172p1- - - - - - hTqS2LjXJVG507hnpyNrlyt1CLGwJfV!-1647092315?styleid=100474928&styleid=100376000&maxvehicle- - - - - - s=5&refid=&op=3&tab=specs
Besides, you wanna drag race your SUV buy a Forester X/T... OOps, no V6...
And drumming up the CRV fire issue, which has been put too rest for a while now, by people other than yourself gets you nowhere. Shall we start drumming up the half dozen+ recalls for the Escape which hmmm, continue even into 2005 with the stalling issue? No, we'll just sweep that under the carpet, Right?
The only recall notice I've received on our '05 was for the latch on the rear hatch. From the NHTSA's site:
"Summary:
CERTAIN 2004-2005 SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES AND CERTAIN 2001-2003 SPORT UTIITY VEHICLE HAVING REAR LIFTGATE COMPONENTS SERVICED WITH 2004 EQUIVALENT COMPONENTS FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 206, 'DOOR LOCKS AND DOOR RETENTION COMPONENTS.' THE REAR LIFTGATE LATCHING SYSTEM DOES NOT MEET THE INERTIA LOAD REQUIREMENT IN ONE DIRECTION.
Consequence:
IF THE LIFTGATE IS LEFT UNLOCKED, THERE IS THE POTENTIAL THAT IT MAY OPEN DURING A CRASH."
No stalling and no other recalls exist for MY05 and none exist for MY06. Where are you getitng your info from?
I'd rather have my hatch open in an accident than the following which the '05 CR-V was recalled for. :P
"Summary:
ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES, THE OCCUPANT POSITION DETECTION SYSTEM'S SIDE SENSOR IS NOT INSTALLED IN THE CORRECT POSITION AND MAY FAIL TO SHUT OFF THE PASSENGER'S SIDE IMPACT AIRBAG IF THE OCCUPANT IS OUT-OF-POSITION.
Consequence:
IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH, SUCH AN OUT-OF POSITION OCCUPANT MAY BE INJURED BY A DEPLOYING SIDE AIRBAG. "
I'm going to get my hatch fixed during an oil change. How long does it take to re-install a side air bag sensor in a new position?
Excerpt from 02' model year for example:
Component: POWER TRAIN:AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION:CONTROL MODULE (TCM, PCM)
Potential Number Of Units Affected : 321903
Summary:
ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH 3.0L V6 ENGINES, DURING DECELERATION, THE ENGINE CAN STALL.
Consequence:
SHOULD THE ENGINE STALL, A VEHICLE CRASH COULD OCCUR.
Remedy:
DEALERS WILL REPROGRAM THE POWER CONTROL MODULE (PCM) WITH THE APPROPRIATE CALIBRATION. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN ON APRIL 21, 2004. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
This recall was announced earlier this year, affecting earlie model Escapes. Just like the CRV fire issue affected EARLY model CRV's. No the 05' CRV is not included, just like the 05' Escape. But ask certain people and the it would be otherwise...
Not anymore, but go back a few years...
NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID Number : 00V277001 Mfg's Report Date : SEP 18, 2000
Component: FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE:DELIVERY
Potential Number Of Units Affected : 10850
Summary:
VEHICLE DESCRIPTION: SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES. THE O-RING SEALS IN THE FUEL LINE CONNECTOR AT THE OUTLET END OF THE FUEL FILTER WERE DAMAGED WHEN THE LINE WAS CONNECTED TO THE FILTER DURING VEHICLE ASSEMBLY. IN SOME CASES, THIS DAMAGE COULD RESULT IN A FUEL ODOR, OR POSSIBLY IN FUEL DRIPPING FROM THE CONNECTION.
Consequence:
FUEL LEAKAGE, IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IGNITION SOURCE, COULD RESULT IN A FIRE.
Remedy:
DEALERS WILL INSPECT AND, IF NECESSARY, REPLACE THE FUEL LINE. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN SEPTEMBER 27, 2000. OWNERS WHO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER ON AN AGREED UPON SERVICE DATE AND DO NOT RECEIVE THE FREE REMEDY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SHOULD CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
Notes:
ALSO CONTACT THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION'S AUTO SAFETY HOTLINE AT 1-888-DASH-2-DOT (1-888-327-4236).
The issue has been accounted for, recalled and fixed. Bingo, no more worry. Funny, you never hear about it anymore... hmmm.
In that case, many points of this discussion would be labeled irrelevant, true?
(I happen to agree with you that different conditions bring about different numbers, but generally, braking confidence should be the same in most conditions, true?)
So true!
but generally, braking confidence should be the same in most conditions, true?
I don't think it's true. Tires are a big factor in braking and I can assure you the stock Conti's on the Escape SUCK. They are loud, don't grip all that well in any conditions, and wear too quickly. A nice set of Good Years, Bridgestones, or Michelins improve the Escape's handling, braking, and tire wear significantly.
I owned an '02 Escape, which stalled on us twice, before the '05 we have now and I can assure you this recall isn't new. In fact, the text you posted states towards the bottom that owner notification began on 4/21/2004 which IIRC is about when we had it performed on our '02. I'm also pretty sure only MY01 JOB2 through 2003 Escapes were the only units affected but correct me if I'm wrong.