CR-V vs Escape

scape2

with beating the 60-0 to death. Plain and simple the Escape has the advantage.
What about carrying capacity. Ok, the CRV comes with a roof rack right? You can put two bikes ontop for two people. Lets say you have 4 people and some gear.. Where do the other 2 bikes go?
Someone mentioned earlier the CRV rear glass does not open? I enjoy having the option to open my glass for quick, light toss in items.

npaladin2000

You're right about the rear glass...that can be a big selling point for people...I know I'd prefer it.

So, what tires did your Escape come with anyway, Scape? We're trying to figure out this stopping distance thing...maybe one car or the other has tires that dont' grip as good as the other.

daveghh

I owned the 98 CRV and I used the rear glass once or twice at the most, so for me missing that feature on the 2002 was not a big deal. Maybe the Escape has a bigger and more ergonomical rear window then the first gen. CRV, yes???

daveghh

You could easily put four bikes on my roofrack, because I have a thule rack on my car.

I missed something, how does the escape excel in that category? Even if I had the factory roofrack instead of Thule...

scape2

I have the 16" wheels with the Continental SUV tire. Not anything special by anymeans. They do ok in snow though and on the everyday logging roads/access roads. They give a nice hwy ride too. I would probably give them a B if I were to grade them. When I bought my Escape that was the first thing I looked at. No way in He... I wanted Firestones on my vehicle! I had read that some people convinced the dealer to swap tires with another brand in order to make a sale.. funny how you don't hear too much more about this fiasco. I wonder how Firestone is doing these days, I'll have to check thier stock performance over the last year.
Dave - you can hold 4 full size bikes ontop of your CRV???? Is your rack rated for this weight and stress? I have a Thule bike rack that slips into the receiver hitch of my Escape and a set of Yakima bike racks ontop of my Escape. There is noway I could fit 4 large bikes ontop of my Escape.. Is the CRV that much wider?? I have a friend with an Explorer and he barely gets 4 bikes ontop of his Explorer..

daveghh

The rack is rated to 150 pounds, the bikes I generally carry weigh anywhere from 25 to 30 pounds. Multiply any of those numbers times four and you are below 150#'s.

As far as width is concerned, I have 50 inch bars on my vehicle and you could face two bikes forward and two bikes backwards.

Anyone with a CRV could have what you have, for a bike system, so how does the ford win in this category?

stever

My racks have 78" bars. Guess I win :-)

Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards

varmint

What's all this about the CR-V not being able to open the rear glass?

The rear gate works both ways. If you're carrying a long item (canoe, kayak, lumber, etc.), you don't have to move it to get the rear door open.

daveghh

Wow, I feel stupid, I forgot about that!

scape2

chomp, chomp, (eating my words)....about the glass...I thought I had read someplace it did not open up..
No receiver hitch that is how the escape wins.. more options.. more ability to carry more bikes!..

scape2

better get MAACO..

http://www.hwysafety.org/news_releases/2002/pr070202.htm

The IIHS issued this study on the 2002 CRV.. ouch. Seems as though the rear tire causes huge amounts of damage, shattering glass, high, high repair costs.. read the entire report..

hondaman01

Rear tire saved me in a crash recently at 30 mph. I had 2000$ and the Ford Explorer that hit me had 5000$ in the front! It absorbed the shock even though the door was totalled. I will take 5 stars any day! Mine is a 2001 however.

scape2

less $$ damage without the rear mounted tire..
"tire saved me"?? Not what this report has to say.. The tire is more of a liability than a savior...

scape2

quiet from the CRV crowd after I posted the link to the IIHS crash study..........

hondaman01

scape the Escape is not 5 stars so your message has nothing to do with people being quiet......I would rather believe that it is summer and people have better things to do! You can also count on Honda fixing this problem very fast as they take this stuff seriously much more than Ford do. Your Escape is by no means perfect my friend and I am living proof of that!

scape2

Escape is 5 stars in all classes but ONE.. its a star in offset crashtests. I don't know what you are talking about?? Seems this IIHS crashtest was also done on the pre-2002 CRV's and was a huge problem back then... yup.. Honda fixes these things "real fast".... And what about the thousands upon thousands of present CRV owners who may have shatter glass flying at their back heads???

hondaman01

Geez scape......wonder why I only had 2000$ damage where the Explorer had 5000$?? My glass did not even break only the door was caved in. He had serious damage to his front end including the complete cooling system, engine components and the hood was buckled almost to the windshield and his airbag went off breaking his nose!! My spare tire (including rim) was not even damaged!!!! This was a new model Explorer and even the owner was very surprised (as I was) how solid my door was. What saved me however was he was high up and did not even hit the lower portion of the vehicle. I have a big hitch and if he would of hit that, it may have ripped the undercarrage pretty good.

I would not go there with the " Honda fixes these things real fast" cause there have not been any miracle cures made to your vehicle lately that is for sure.....stalling, noisy, NVH problems ect...ALL of Hondas vehicles have been rated ahead of all Americas so don't go there as it would be easy to produce the threads for that one (as you always say)

The CRV was always considered to be one of the safest vehicles on the market and that I have read the articles BUT there is no such thing as a safe car in ANY accident because it is made of metal and plastic. Also, glass does not fly around as you say because it is tempered....I thought you would know that being an engineer!

scape2

my link at post 1110 says it all. And it won't get buried or lost or forgotten. I have posted and linked it in several other chats around the net and it is getting some attention.... the study says it all......

hondaman01

I haver lots of links for you too but for some reason I can't get them to register on this board as they have more than 115 characters!!?? How do you get past this?

tidester

Try http://makeashorterlink.com

tidester
Host
SUVs; Aftermarket & Accessories

sacfocus1

Just recieved the latest Automobile mag. August issue with a long term test of the Escape. Check it out; Transmission failure, master cylinder leaking; door handle loose, yes sir makes you want to go out and buy a Ford today!

canadatwo

had lowest cost of repairs from those crash tests scape was talking about (even better than the Escape!)

Zippy, great handling, well built (in Japan), loads of room, comfortable, reliable, looks vastly improved.

Subaru has a winner for many of us in the Forester.

daveghh

I own the CRV and I think the 2003 Forester is a nice car and I would have considered it as an alternative to the CRV, but I like the height of the CRV and the bigger space while maintaining the mileage of the forester. Both great cars. Something is abrasive about the Escape to me I can't quite put my hands on it. I do, however think the Escape is a fairly attractive vehicle.

--- --- --- --- --- --- ---

I am not concerned about the 5 mph bumper test results because if I am dumb enough to back into things that is my own fault, NOT honda.

Secondly, if someone backs into me, most vehicles miss the tire and hit the bumper on the CRV, or lack there of So 5 mph test results is not an issue for me!

diploid

I was thinking the same thing...if a sedan runs into the back of the CR-V, its hood would more than likely hit the CR-V's bumper, or probably even wedge beneath the CR-V. I know on the Acura MDX, Honda engineers built in a "compatibility bracket" down there to prevent that from happening. Don't know if the CR-V has it.

varmint

No Scape2, I'm not gone. I've just been busy with other projects and more entertaining discussions.

I have to agree with Scape2 on the IIHS bumper bash. The CR-V scored very poorly in the two rear impact tests. No excuses. It would be easy to place all the blame on the rear-mounted spare tire, but I think there is more to it than that. The 1st gen CR-V had a rear mounted spare and it scored better than some vehicles without one.

Whether or not you consider those impact tests to be realistic or important is your decision. Take them for what they are worth. Just remember that they have little to do with a 2mph impact or a 10mph impact. They have little to do with an impact from another vehicle (the sedan example from above).

For the purpose of comparison, the spare tire issue is a matter of opinion. Got a flat? You're better off with the CR-V's full-size spare. Back into a pole or high wall? You're better off with the Escape's rear bumper.

In matters of safety, I would go with the CR-V. The NHTSA tests show an advantage for the Honda, but not a huge advantage. However, the Euro NCAP tests suggest that the CR-V is also very safe in off-set crashes. That is a claim that the Escape cannot make. We'll have to wait for the '02 CR-V to be tested, but so far it looks good.

On a completely unrelated safety matter, the CR-V was the only vehicle in recent ratings to achieve a 3 star rating (out of 4) for pedestrian impact safety. Most other vehicles scored a 1 in this test. So even the people outside of the CR-V are safer than most.

Sacfocus - On the other hand, Edmunds long-term Tribute hasn't had any problems. Even though it has been published in a magazine, it's still anecdotal evidence. The only reliability data that matters are the large scale surveys.

freeber

Thanks for posting that DAYS after the rest of the world knew about it. This information will come in SUPER handy the next time a POST comes driving down the highway and rear-ends me. This test doesn't simulate REAL WORLD conditions very well at all. (unless most of us make a habit of backing into posts......) That said, there is STILL no excuse for the Honda posting numbers like this. Honda has stated their number one concern is passenger saftey. I'm guessing this 'test' will get addressed in the 2004 model as it would be too late to fix anything in the 2003 model.

I bet any vehicle with a rear tire on the back receives more damage to the back because ITS MOUNTED TO THE BACK.

You think maybe it got quiet because you posted on the 4th of July weekend?

The Escapes braking advantage is just as important as the more spacious cabin of the CRV.

I've had 2 years of Physics, Statics, and Dynamics. I'm here to tell you that I don't care HOW MANY equations you throw at that issue, the fundamental arguement is valid. You will be traveling MUCH slower those last 4 feet, and you don't need ANY physics to figure that out. would I say the 8 MPH is the exact speed you would be traveling? No, but I bet it's within + or - 3MPH after you throw EVERY EQUATION IN THE BOOK AT IT. If you are doing a comparison, you have to assume at least SOME similarities. (assume same tire friction, pavement temp/friction, vehicle/occupant/load factors...etc)

I could (I don't have my rack yet) get 4 bikes on top of my V' easily. I've done it on a S-10 Blazer and the V' isn't that much more narrow. Tack another 4 on a hitch if I wanted to. (or had a hitch installed...=P)

odds009

I feel sorry for you....
You know what? You could be an excellent salesman for Ford.
) Why don't you try it?

Have fun!!!

scape2

I hit a soft spot with the CRV owners and this IIHS test... Looks like the CRV isn't as bullet proof as you want so badly to believe! I actually found this at another chat site by another Escape owner! It had never been posted in this room and wow! what a reaction.. lots of excuses.. love them.. its out on the net and is circulating in the wonderful information highway we call the internet..
Forester.. LOL.. I have to say I would buy a CRV over a Forester.. don't get me started pleeease..
Freebe... Nope the Escape stops faster from 60 to 0 than the CRV.. and I think stopping faster is a heck of a lot more important than an extra few inches of cabin space...

hondaman01

http://makeashorterlink.com/?F24325831

Have a look at your perfect Escape!!!!!! Consumers speak! If you want I can link you to the 2002 CRV......8 minor complaints!! Accept reality! No one denies the fact that Honda made a mistake with the back bumper but maybe you should not deny that Ford made a big mistake period that is going to cost a lot of dollars for them!

hondaman01

You are right scape...it is important to stop faster especially when your engine will stall all the time!

canadatwo

as a former Escape (V6 XLT 4x4) owner, I prefer the new 2003 Forester.

Must be seen.

Just as much if not more space than the Escape, will be more reliable, better handling, cost less to repair in those crash tests that you talk about.

have fun.

varmint

Scape2 - If you want a crash test to talk about, try this one.

http://www.highwaysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0105.htm

freeber

http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0213.htm

UH OH!!!

freeber

I only back into poles, what good is this BEST PICK rating going to do for me?!?!?!?

Scape, keep convincing yourself that 4' is a major difference. Better? Sure. Big deal? I don't think so. I'm sure you'll come back with the same arguement should the CRV get down below the Escape in braking distance. Looking at your crash test results, you're gonna need that 4 feet a heck of a lot more than I am.

(though you would best me in a 'backing into a pole' competition....=P)

hondaman01

http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/gw/4cylinder.htm

Something new for you to argue about! Don't you find it odd that you come up with one little problem and we come up with about a hundred. Where are all your links you promised a couple of months back? I have about 40 more if you would like to see them!? Keep em comin!

diploid

Did the RAV4 get a bump in displacement? The article says that the 2.4L is shared by both the Camry and RAV4, but last time I checked it was still a 2.0L for the RAV.

suvshopper4

diploid: Maybe they meant the 4-cyl Highlander?

hondaman01

Must be a mistake!

daveghh

Good luck with all this new "news" Scape2!

hondaman01

It's raining today and I can't work outside so I guess I will stir scape a little and compare the CRV 2002 to the link I sent in #1128! Enjoy!

http://makeashorterlink.com/?K45021931

Notice how many consumer complaints there are? "0"!!!!!!! About the same amount of vehicles have been sold for each model so I am waiting for an excuse as to why this is?

diploid

I wouldn't mind a bump to 2.4 for the RAV4. My friend has one...that car really IS fun to drive.

hondaman01

Yes diploid, I rented one last December and it was very sporty but a wee bit cheap inside and some rattles but a very reliable vehicle. Too small in back to compare to the CRV. I always wondered why Toyota did not make it bigger the second time around. They had a really good chance to capitolize over Honda but did not do it.

varmint

For comparison's sake, let's put the two next to each other.

http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/cecompoutc.asp

freeber

I mean, the camera angles are obviously different.

Not to mention there is no mention of the coefficient of friction difference between the seat coverings in the Escape vs. the CR-V.

And I think the dummy in the Escape had French Fry grease on its hands.......

baggs32

Here's hoping that all of your crashes are identical to the IIHS's!

I can't remember if it was on this board or the CR-V board, but one CR-V owner had the theory that the IIHS designed the bumper bash test to specifically damage certain SUV's. Could it be that Honda designed the CR-V to perform very well in their offset test? (Note: I'm not really serious, I just wanted to see what it was like to use "fuzzy" logic too.)

Every crash is unique, and every vehicle has a different design making it even harder to get accurate results. Move the vehicles to the left, let's say two inches, and the results might be significantly different.

Don't get me wrong, these still are the best guides we have for judging vehicle safety. Crash testing is expensive and complicated, so we are going to have to live with what we've got for a while. Just stay away from the vehicles that score poorly in both the IIHS and the NHTSA tests.

hondaman,

"Where are all your links you promised a couple of months back?" post 1134

You're about the last person that should be asking someone else for links to back up their argument. It's nice to see that all of your fellow CR-V owners are helping you out though.

scape,

"And what about the thousands upon thousands of present CRV owners who may have shatter glass flying at their back heads??? " post 1115

I saw the video clips from the bumper bash tests. The glass on both the CR-V and Freelander popped out onto the ground, not into the vehicle. That's not to say it wouldn't though. It looked to me like they both needed new rear doors too.

diploid

freeber- The camera angles look the same to me for both pictures. Pretty fair comparison IMO.

freeber

I was joking....I'm here all week, tip your waitress....

suvshopper4

Shoot, man, I was just about to respond to your statement "the coefficient of friction difference between the seat coverings in the Escape vs. the CR-V."
I had links and everything...

varmint

Baggs - You are correct on several counts.

It is possible that the manufacturer could design a vehicle so that it passes known tests, but could potentially fail in others. But the potential to fail in other tests applies to those that fail the known tests as well.

It is also correct to say that these tests do not represent the majority of real life crashes. While the IIHS crash may be the most common sort of crash it still may represent less than 1% of the total number of crashes on our highways. (If anyone knows the actual number, I'd like to know it.) Same goes for the NHTSA tests.

That said, I'd still go with the one with some record of sucess.

Here's a more specific look at the IIHS measures their data.

http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/imcompoutc.asp

Freeber - You're missing the point. The Escape has more HP, so it should be hauling, towing, pulling more weight when it hits the impact barrier. ;-) (sorry I couldn't resist)

varmint

Awww.... I guess we can't link directly to the comparisons. The IIHS allows you to compare two vehicles (within each class) for both the ratings and the actual intrusion measurements. That's what I was trying to link to in earlier posts. They're kinda kewl.