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
Why didn't this fire issue happen in prior model CRV's? Doesn't the Uglyment, oops, I mean Element have the same engine? Why doesn't it happen or didn't it happen on the Element? Design flaw.. I have to give Honda a kudos on not getting this to be a recall. Can you imagine on what CRV sales would have done?? can you say tank??? :surprise:
Nice try though. Anyone knows Honda doesn't deal, Honda's are spendy. This is no secret if you know the car market.
All I can see are small improvements to the Escape/Trib/Mariner. I foresee some sort of traction control/stability control in the next couple of years.. along with some sort of special packages of some sort.... But as far as a face lift??
You obviously don't know my background or where I reside... I take my Escape into the Cascade Mountain range. Ever heard of it? Ever heard of MT Hood? MT ST. Helens? or MT Jefferson area? These are some of the tallest in the Continetal United States if you don't know... I take my Escape up skiing, to finding my favorite fishing spots, too towing my two watercraft visiting the beautiful lakes we have in this region. My Escape has been on more logging/access roads... Granted, I know this vehicles limitations. I am not willing to chance twisting my car frame. I would no-way claim this vehicle to be an "offroader". But I can say I have been worse places than these photo's you offer.. I know I can bet my house I have had my Escape put through more tests than many of these CRV owners on this board. And even through all this pounding my "unreliable" Escape has 60,000 trouble free miles on it! Yup, Ford can't make great vehicles.. You would have a hard time convincing me......
But you already know all that. You just keep posting the same garbage over and over, even when you know it's false.
You may be interested in the now archived Honda CR-V engine fires discussion.
tidester, host
:sick:
LOL.....Real world prices in the paper? LMAO......Haven't we been down this road before?
Thank you.....You beat me to it.
tidester, host
Fastest Acceleration: Saturn Vue
Most HP: Saturn Vue
Most Torque: Jeep Liberty CRD.
Most Interior Room: Honda CR-V
Lowest Initial Price: Kia Sportage/Hyundai Tucson
Lowest TCO: Honda CR-V
Highest Resale: Honda CR-V
Longest Warranty: Kia Sportage/Hyundai Tucson
Best MPG Rating: Toyota RAV4
Best Offroader: Jeep Liberty (any model)
Highest Tow Rating: Jeep Liberty
Most Standard Safety Features: Honda CR-V and Kia Sportage/Hyundai Tucson
Best Reliability: Toyota RAV4 and Honda CR-V
I could be wrong on a couple of these, but these are the class leaders to the best of my knowledge. For me, safety, mpg, reliability and long term resale value were the most important factors. That's why I chose the CR-V. Do you notice anything about this list, though??? The Escape isn't the best at anything. It's pretty good at a lot of things, but most people have a few specific things they are looking for in a vehicle.
That's what the Escape's biggest problem is. It's grown rather long in the tooth, and many of these vehicles have been redesigned at least once since the Escape was introduced, and in some cases, they will have been redesigned twice in the next year. In a market as crowded as this market is, you can't afford to stand still. The new Kia/Hyundai, Suzuki Grand Vitara, CR-V, RAV4, and others won't let you. This is symptamatic (sp?) of Ford's problems as a whole, and it's one of the main reasons they are having trouble selling cars and maintaining the resell values of those cars. It won't be long, and the Escape is going to become a non-factor.
Engine fire's are just gaskets huh? If this hold true the engine was rotated 180 degrees.. DESIGN FLAW...
:confuse:
:confuse:
From 1996 through 2001, the CR-V used a variant of Honda's B series engine. The B series is the same family of engines used in the Civic. In order to make this small block work in the CR-V, Honda developed a new manufacturing technique. The crankshaft in these engines rotated counterclockwise. That's the way Honda did things for many years. A while back they decided to reverse the rotation, so they could sell engines to other companies (most others go clockwise). As I'm sure you're aware, Saturn took advantage of this change when they gave the VUE Honda's 3.5L V6.
In 2002, Honda switched to a new series of engines. This is a whole new family of engines, named the K series. The first of the K series engines are the ones used in the Acura RSX. Variants of the K-series engines may be found in the Accord, Element, and TSX, as well as the CR-V. These engines rotate clockwise. Hence they are mounted in the engine bay 180 degrees from the old design.
This has absolutely nothing to do with the O-ring issue.
Also, in regard to Honda "hiding" the great CR-V scandle, or as it's known by people in the know, "Firegate," I find it funny that it has been predicted by a poster or two that Honda will go out of business in 10 to 15 years, and its been pointed out that Ford sells more F150s than Honda sells total vehicles, yet Honda has the political, marketing and economical sway to consistently hide all its shortcomings and pull the wool over peoples' eyes. It's amazing, when you think about it. A company, on the brink of disaster, spending all its manpower and capital resources to keep from undergoing a recall...
:confuse:
Engine fire's are just gaskets huh? If this hold true the engine was rotated 180 degrees.. DESIGN FLAW...
The previous generation of Honda engines, B and D series rotated counter clock wose and had the pulleys on the driver's side. Starting with the K-series engines, particualrly K24 (Accord, Element, CR-V, TSX) and K-20 (Civic Si, RSX, and RSX Type S), then engines are turning like the rest of the engines, clockwise, and have been turned 180°. Anyone familiar with Honda knows that.
On the B, and D engines the intake was on the firewall side and exhaust was near the radiator. On the new K-series (the same engines that make Ford V6 look humble in 0-60 tests) have intake on the radiator side and the exhaust on the firewall side.
The reason Accords and Elements did not have engine fire problems because they were assembled in the US, while CR-V's are assembled in UK and Japan. The underlying cause was that defective gaskets deteriaoted when exposed to sea water mist on the 6 week voyage from Japan or UK.
Honda resolved the problem, by replacing the filters on existing unsold stock, and by using new filter gaskets on newly built ones It is not a design flaw. A design flaw would be to have a 3 liter V6 lose to 2.4L I4 .
Seems Scape is the only one who tows 3000 lbs boat to and from work, everyday. The rest of us don't. Maybe Scape should have gotten an F-350 Duramax???
Honda V6 runs cirlces around Duratec V6 in the Escape.
Seeing as SUVs aren't built for racing in general I see nothing wrong with putting an engine that tows and hauls well into said SUV rather than one that races well. If you want to race there are other versions of the Duratec30 that do a better job and they are bolted into the proper package for that job. :P
Sing along!
... like a record baby right round round round...
Most HP: Saturn Vue "
Well, OK, if you allow that it's a Honda engine in the Vue. Anyone know how much longer that deal is going to go?
honda engines are still #2 as far as japanese engines go. it's not toyota, mitsu, mazda, subaru or suzuki either. :surprise: !
:surprise:
You know that's the same guy who later formed Marilynn Manson...
#1 of 6699 After reading the review by scape2 Jan 10, 2002 (11:33 am)
I had to add this topic. Edmunds states the CRV bests the Escape V6 in 0-60 times. I happen to have a friend who works for a Honda dealer. I took an Escape V6 and a new Honda CRV and we did our own 0-60 tests. The Escape bested the CRV everytime! I am beginning to question Edmunds testing. Please explain how you did your 0-60 tests.
We did ours by first marking off 1 mile on a flat, straight abandoned road. We started each vehicle from a stopped position. We did this at least 6x and everytime the Escape would prevail??
How?
Sing along!
... like a record baby right round round round...
Cute-utes are not for heavy duty towing either, not with the unibody construction. Which logically says that CR-V is best at what it is designed to do: Light to moderate off-roading and high fuel efficiency. Escape is neither.
Certain someone boasts how he tows his boat up a mountain, but fails to mention that he did it on a paved road, not a trail. According to that same someone, a CR-V shoudl not be able to get up a mountain. Here is a picture taken on the last outing Honda SUV had. According to the embossment the elevation is 3,491 ft. This is where we parked.
Top of mount Greylock loos pretty high, and 4 cylinder CR-V did not lose a beat climbing.
Oh, NO!!! No pavement...
A more telling example would be the Mt. Washington Auto road. Average grade of 12% the whole way up. You should have been with us when we did it at the last HondaSUV Olympics.
As for the rest... Most will not use a small SUV for towing. Most will not use a small SUV for off-roading. Most will load it up with kids and a stroller on weekends. They will commute to work 5 days a week.
That's why the CR-V's superior fuel economy, safety, and reliability are so key.
By the way.. ever look at the recalls for the CRV? or the TSB's for the CRV?? I guess not.. it shows...
PS - Still waiting for the specs on the CR-V and the Escape you "compared"...
:sick:
The Ford PR engine is spinning it's wheels. Get out and research it on the internet. It's all over about the problems Escapes have. That stands to figure the spinning continues, since according to the newest sales figures, Ford's sales are down 23%, and Honda's are up by 4%.
:surprise:
So much for Honda going out of business...
As for your mountains, the measure that is relative to this discussion is how steep the road is going up.
But even your assumptions regarding the height of the peak are erroneous. It's not the total elevation that matters, it's the vertical rise. What most people don't know is that the mountains in New Hampshire's Presidential Range are the equal to many of the big peaks in Colorado and elsewhere in the west.
Mt. Washington's vert. is 3,675 ft.
Madison's vert. is 3,800 ft.
The vert. for Adams (in NH) is 4,500 ft.
For comparison, Steamboat's vert. is 3,668 ft.
Your own Rainier's vert. is 4,500 ft. (the same as our Adams)
Accoding to what I've seen on the web, your Mt. Hood has a vert. of only 2,777 ft. (Maybe some viagra is in order.)
And as long as we're quoting song lyrics (hint: title of post).
Someone's paranoia is showing again. And what exactly is a CRV? I'm familiar with the Honda vehicle CR-V. Perhaps someone can enlighten the rest of us as to what those three letters refer to?
I know varmint will set the record straight but I think Honda's engines now spin in the same direction as most others automaker's including Ford? If so, wouldn't that "design flaw" also apply to them?
Someone should go out and buy their third or fourth Escape (I've lost track). I imagine the Ford dealers are dealing...especially in the Pacific Northwest.
This is where I would insert the blurb about Ford's horrendous October results. But someone beat me to it.
I bought my CRV to commute and have nice traction in the rain. I wanted room to carry the occasional big box of whatever. The mountain stuff is fun but it is not the primary reason for the purchase.
By the way, when I get to the top of my mountain, I have a handy button on my keyfob that rotates my engine 180 degrees to help me get back down.
"By the way, when I get to the top of my mountain, I have a handy button on my keyfob that rotates my engine 180 degrees to help me get back down."
Clever those Japanese.
Not sure if you are serious: Comfortable Runabout Vehicle
How is someone going to explain that making the CR-V engine turn in the same way as the Escape's is a flaw?
How is someone going to explain that rotating an engine makes a gasket stick?
How is someone going to explain that the "mountain" they climbed is shorter than the "hill" the next guy climbed?
How is someone going to explain that Ford continues to plummet in overall sales, and Honda continues to rise?
My guess is someone out there will pull out the slide rule, or better yet, go for the jugular with an original insult like "Combustible Recreational Vehicle", since that person will have nothing better to say.
I'm sure glad I'm not that someone...
:shades:
speaking of mount washington, years ago, my 8 year old duster made it up and down and didn't need a brake job afterwards. does bring back memories. i've seen bumper stickers that proclaim 'this car climbed mount washington'.
i put a bumper sticker on the duster that read, 'this car fell off mount washington'.
I understand it's part of our culture, this whole of obsession with bigger everything, but this is one aspect in which I think the rest of the world has it right. More efficient automobiles should be the goal, just as all of the guys I listed above are very efficient. I'd like to see American automobile companies strive for more efficiency. That's why I applaud Ford for making the Escape Hybrid. However, in some people's book, this must just be a waste of time.
So just because your CR-V does what you want it to do, i.e. gets decent fuel mileage and can do light off-roading, it is the best small-ute out there?
Sorry, but that means it was the best choice for you, not me. I wanted the ability to carry heavier loads inside and out of my small ute as well as up and down huge hills day in and day out. I'm not talking about those wimpy long inclines you show in your picutres either. Some of the hills I drive on every day, to and from work, are not long in distance but they are nearly straight up and down. I'm not exaggerating either.
Therefore, the Escape or the Liberty would have been the best choice for me, not the CR-V. Obviously your definition of a small-ute differs from mine.
Also, I could care less about fuel mileage (to a certain point), reliability, TCO, or emissions. Arguably some of the CR-V's strong points. I'll let you clean up after me. :P
I did not know that! Did MM do a cover of that song? For some reason I can hear it in my head. Among other things. :surprise:
Drom,
Was it a 4% increase when compared to the same time last year? Honda has added completely new vehicles to it's line recently while Ford has not. I went over this once before, when you add vehicles to your line they bring a 100% increase to the table during sales calculations. The Ridgeline is the most recent and the Accord hybrid may be another depending on how Honda does their calculations.
I don't have Honda's sales chart in front of me right now so feel free to correct me if I'm totally off above.
Ford also discontinued the Thunderbird and Excursion, and they are slowly sending the Taurus off to pasture (no pun intended) which affects the bottom line very negatively.
I'm not saying the Ridgeline is the big difference here because Ford's sales did free fall in October, the Explorer and Expedition mostly, no doubt. With the Explorer being redesigned (I've driven an EB V8 model and it's worlds better than the older model), the new Fusion, continued brisk sales of the Mustang and Five Hundred I think they'll be OK. FWIW Ford (the brand) sales are only off 3.4% for the YTD compared to last year.
It might still get worse before it gets better.
Maybe one of the Eskape owners can tell me.
This is always a popular question, "What does CR-V stand for?"
The answer is, "Comfortable Runabout Vehicle". This is not widely known, and your local dealer, who probably doesn't know the truth, may have fabricated their own definition for the term...