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
For some people, the extra cost of operating a 6-cyl is worth it. For others, it is unnecessary additional cost.
As usual, it comes down to priorities.
The V6 has the advantage in acceleration. Yes, the CR-V has bested the Escape in several 0-60 runs. 0-60 is the standard for the industry, but it's not the best measure for your average buyer. As a result, the Escape will certainly "feel" more aggressive. Is it a significant difference? Well, that depends on your driving style. I obviously think it's no big deal. Both will giddyup when you need them to.
The V6 loses the comparo when it comes to fuel efficiency. A difference of a few gallons (2-3) isn't much, even over a long period of time, but real world reports suggest that the difference is more like 4-7 mpg. That's borderline significant in my book. This gives the CR-V an edge in the daily driver category.
The V6 also falls short when it comes to emissions. Not that the Escape is a dirty, smoking, toxin making machine. It's an LEV, which is good enough for most folks. However, the CR-V takes it a step further to meet LEVII standards, which are actually closer to the current ULEV levels. Is this significant? Probably not. It'll only matter to the real green folks or the technology hounds.
Towing is another area where the Escape's V6 shines. Add the towing package available through Ford and the Escape can tow twice the weight that a CR-V can haul. To be fair, the CR-V is under-rated here in the states (in other countries it's rated for a more reasonable 2,000lbs), but it still doesn't match the Escape's total of 3K. Does it matter? IMHO, not much. People who tow are almost as uncommon as people who go off-road. The CR-V can handle small boats, jet skis, and even small campers. That's all that most people will try to tow with a vehicle labeled "mini-ute". Anyone looking to haul something larger will probably go for a mid-size even if all they need is something like the Escape. Still, it's an advantage for the Escape if anyone does frequent towing or falls into the rare category of persons hauling a big load with a small vehicle.
The "un-category" category: Or anything else that people might notice. Based on reviews I've read, I have to give the CR-V the edge in smoothness, both during acceleration and while at idle. Honda did a heck of good job making a large pot, four banger purr like a kitten. Power delivery is likely to be pretty even in both vehicles. I'm told that the Escape can be kind rough at higher rpms. The CR-V has a nice flat torque curve with it's peak at the midrange, while the Escape just has gobs of torque period. With it's peak in the high part of the rev band, I'd guess that the curve isn't as flat as the CR-V, but it's still cranking out more twist at both high and low.
Keep downplaying the advantages of the V6. "Real world" whos world? My MPG average is 21 others at escapecentral are getting 21-23.. Tow rating on the Escape is 3,500lbs not 3,000. You will find out real quick what added HP/Torque will give you when your CRV is loaded down and the A/c is on and you try to go up a steep hill or pass on the freeway. The V6 is in no way loud, its 24Valvs purrr..
1.Compared EX auto with XLT. CR-V better value.
2.Compared reliability issues. CR-V more consistant.
3.Compared economy. CR-V wins
4.Compared comfort. CR-V narrow winner
5. Compared styling. Escape wins(actually liked TRIB better).
6. Compared resale. CR-V wins.
7.Towing not a factor for me.
8.Compared creature comforts. Escape wins narrow.
The clincher was I was able to negotiate $800 off MSRP! And,for me piece of mind that I will have less problems during ownership.Just my personal opinion.
If I wanted a V6, towing capabilities, etc. I wouldn't have looked at small SUVs. A V6 in these small utes is overkill. I'm starting to think you got the engine to justify the vehicle.
"Compared reliability issues. CR-V more consistant."
Sorry, but the quality 'gap' between the Escape and the CRV is not as wide as the 'die hard' CRV fans here indicate..
From what I see most folks on this thread are happy with their choice. Both vehicles are great options in this class. The difference in price between the 2 are very close. Someone claimed the CRV is a better value.. I compared the CRV EX to the XLT choice2, and there's about $400 difference in real world price between the 2.. But the Escape has the V6, power seats, and 16" wheels.
thought 200 HP was a little too much for the
size if in the wrong hands.I am an older driver
and think power is great if used wisely.Young
people tend to be overexuberant about use of power.When I took off from the rental store
the tires were squealing which will get you a ticket most places.I also have an Acura 3.2TL
which has lots of power but is very confidence
inspiring.If I had more $$ I would have gotten the MDX.Next time.
Just not going to happen my friend. 200HP/200ft/lbs of torque vs 160HP/160ft/lbs of torque and the CRV has only a 170LB advantage. It just doesn't add up. Honda owners can keep on downplaying the V6 in the Escape but every review I have read has given this vehicle rave reviews on performance, agility, road manners, suspension you name it. The V6 is just one of the Escapes advantages. Honda owners will find out real fast when their CRV's are loaded down with 4 adults, and filled with gear. Then try to pass on the freeway or go up a steep incline, then you will be wishing you had a V6.
Price advantage/value - The Escape offers a V6 for the SAME price now as the CRV. Honda owners keep justifying in their minds they have the most reliable vehicles. I can see why when Honda hides TSB's from the public, take a look at www.alldata.com. visit other sites around the net you will find many ticked off Honda owners who expected perfection....
Also, your claim that a CRV can best an Escape is done. The Escape reaches its 201HP at 5900rpms, and its 200ft/lbs of torque at 4700rpms.. the CRV reaches its 160HP at 6000RPMS!!! talk about having to wind up your 4cyl engine, and reaches its 162ft/lbs of torque at 3600rpms. I knew this was bogus garbage when I read the 5spd CRV bested the automatic Escape...
"You will find out real quick what added HP/Torque will give you when your CRV is loaded down and the A/c is on and you try to go up a steep hill or pass on the freeway."
You have said similar things several times. Have you tried this in a CR-V? I have nearly 5,000 miles on my 2002 CR-V (manual). I have taken long trips with four passengers and the back loaded. I had NO problems with inadequate power at any time. Obviously the Escape's 6 cylinder is going to deliver more power, but that doesn't mean the CR-V's is inadequate or under powered. Honda has done a marvelous job of building an efficient yet powerful 4 cylinder vehicle. I have yet to experience a situation where I wished for a larger engine.
Scape2 - TruckTrend, 5th Anniversary Issue, with January/February listed as the month. The article is titled, "SUV Lite", and it starts on page 28. The article is a comparison of the RAV4, CR-V, Feelander, and Escape. Skip to page 37 and you'll find the performance stats spelled out in nice clean print.
The Automatic CR-V scoots from 0-60 in 8.93 seconds. The 200 hp, V6 Escape does the same in 9.0 seconds. FWIW, the Freelander takes 10.5 seconds and the 5 speed RAV4 beat everybody with a score of 8.90 seconds.
Now I'll be the first to say that the CR-V was slower off the line. The Escape has the best score for 0-30. The Escape also had a better time for the 1/4 mile at 16.7 vs. 16.9 seconds. But the fact of the matter is that the differences in these scores are not significant. In other words, it looks like an automatic CR-V can run with the V6 Escape.
5900 rpms vs 6000 rpms. You're kidding, right? A whopping 100 rpm difference!
Meanwhile the CR-V's torque output peaks at 3,600 while the Escape's doesn't peak until 4,700 rpms. Hmmm... maybe a little math is in order... Oh, yes, that 1,100 rpms lower than the Escape. Another way to write that would be the difference is eleven times the 100 rpms you were worried about with the hp peaks.
And you think that the CR-V is a high revver? ROTFLMAO!
You folks really need to get out on the net to Epinions and the many other reviews coming from real owners of Escapes/Tributes. Thousands upon thousands of happy owners with NO PROBLEMS..
Did you know the Duratec has a dual timing chain, NOT a belt.. like your CRV....
The potential for fake Epinions reviews to favor the Escapes/Tributes is just as high as fake ones that trash the Escapes/Tributes.
The one thing that I most remember from Psych 101 (many long years ago) is that you encourage desirable behavior with positive reinforcement and you discourage undesirable behavior with NO RESPONSE. IF you ignore it... it will eventually get bored and quit.
No offense intended to Scape. It's just that we have heard the same old song too many times. Yes the Escape is a powerful SUVette. I think it's good looking too. And in a drag race against a CRV, I'd bet on the Escape. But, right or wrong. I would not buy one, simply because of questionable quality, poor fuel economy, and (I'm guessing here) low resale value.
If I offended anyone, just ignore me. (joke)
-james
Questionable quality? how? please link me to this? If you are talking the 1.5 year old recalls that only affected certain build lots and dates you are way behind the times, oldnews..
So, I guess you wouldn't buy an Odessey either with its bad quality record and numerous recalls??
Low resale?? How can you judge resale when the vehicle is only 2 years old? Don't assume what you don't know anything about..
The V6 is just one of the Escapes huge advantage over the other SUV's in this class. This give the Escape towing power, pulling power, hauling power, passing power, better acceleration. I wouldn't call this the same old story....
FWIW, I'm not interested on proving that one is faster than the other. I'm just saying that the Ford V6 doesn't have a significant advantage in terms of speed. There are many reasons why and all have been documented back at the beginning of this thread.
Oregonboy - You need to go to the archives from three years ago and read the CR-V vs Forester threads. The debates were just a "colorful" coming from both sides. It was a great way to learn about both vehicles, though. I have a tremedous amount of respect for Soob thanks to those debates. Nowadays, we just quote old arguments like chess moves.
Once again... There are several reviews around the net that have the Escape at anywhere from 8.1 up to 8.5 0-60 times. And when people test drive them they will see the true advantage of a V6..
Just keep downplaying the advantages to a small V6.. Facts are facts.. the V6 is a huge advantage over the 4cyl CRV. Tows more, hauls more, pulls more, just plain does more. And at only a 1-3MPG difference.. Cost of maybe 1-2 dollars each fill-up....
In the words of Tim Allen - More power! aarh aarh
The DEGREE of advantage for the V6 is in the "eye of the beholder." I don't need the V6. The 4 cylinder CR-V has plenty enough power for my use. Why pay more (in terms of gas) for power that I don't need and do not want. If you need more power or simply want more power for whatever reason, then the V6 is a good choice. That does not make the CR-V a bad choice for the rest of us.
I also posted that you are using data that is not head to head (different testers, different test conditions, and possibly different methodologies). If you're going to bring that sort of data to the discussion, so will I. Hence the 5 speed times.
Phillyguy - There have been "problems" boards for the CR-V in the past. Each time, they've died from lack of activity.
FWIW, the '02 CR-V is experiencing its share of first year issues. Though, not as many as the Tribape (and, no, I'm not counting recalls, either).
Could have been the driver I suppose....
that said there is no significant advantage having the V6 unless you want to tow something slightly larger or want slightly worse mileage.
SUV insurance is only higher because of 4 wheel drive... so if you have a two wheel drive crv or escape you will pay the same as a civic or whatever the escape is based on.... or close to it (if, and I say if they both retail for the same amount).
I don't know what your definition of racing is, but 0-60 in 8 seconds (or even more) is hardly racing. Most people have to do that just to merge onto the highway from an exit ramp (at least in NJ, anyway).
When the CR-V was first released, there was a recall for the front seat belt. That's been fixed.
Recently, a number of owners began reporting an issue with the check engine light. Seems that the chip programming was too sensitive and was registering an emissions problem when there wasn't one (the code points to the O2 sensor). It only happens under freakish circumstances, so it was hard to track down. Honda has a fix for it, but, since the issue involves emissions regulations, the fix needs to be tested by the US gov't. I'm told it should be approved by May.
Then there has been a problem with the front seat "rocking". This is a problem with the bushings under the seat. The TSB for this is number 02-017 for US models. Canadians have a different numbering system. It was issued on 3/17, so units built around that time already have the fix.
Basically, the only known issue you "might" have to deal with is the CEL. The others have been fixed. When the regulators have their chance to test the new programming, Honda will issue a TSB. Until that time, they cannot.
Depends on your perspective.
Right, you HOnda owners will never know what is wrong with your CRV's because Honda doesn't allow TSB information to flow freely. www.alldata.com... go take a look, or should I say, don't look???
I know this is off topic, but varmit is right. There was an article in last Months Motor Trend about the Civic Si, Sentra SER, Subaru WRX, Ford Focus SVT I believe. All these cars were quicker from 0-60 than many of the well known muscle cars of the 60's and early 70's. I couldn't believe it myself! At the same time these cars weigh quite a bit less and it proves how far technology has come in cars..
phillyguy, I am well aware of sales numbers. Anyone who follows new introductory of redesigned vehicles knows the first year is always the best year. Plus, I would be willing to be many of the CRV buyers are trading in old ones and buying new ones....
Seriously, it looks like the Ford Escape and Honda CR-V are just really destined for different markets, even though they're both mini-utes. The CR-V seems more like the "Soccer-mom" mobile, made for carrying around people and a bunch of vacation stuff, or that sort of thing, if you get my idea. And no, I'm not insulting "soccer-moms"...they just tend to need particular things in a vehicle.
Then you have other owners, who look for power, towing capacity, height, and a little extra off-road ability. That's the Escape, with it's stiffer (though still unibody) body, and extra horsepower, and the like.
Basically, the Escape is closer to the "truck" end of the mini-ute market, while the CR-V is edging toward the minivan part of the mini-ute line.
Just my take on the subject, of course. Quality issues aside, and recall issues aside, the first priority for a car shopper is going to be whether a vehicle meets their needs, not which one is "better" or has "the best quality." The best quality in the world won't help you if the car that has it doesn't meet your needs.
I must say that this board has been helpful to me while I shop for my next vehicle...I've been following it closely. Unfortunately, after test driving, neither of these vehicles made the final cut, but it wasn't for quality issues on the Escape side, and it wasn't power issues on the CR-V side. After test-driving both, I found that I didn't like the handling and suspension on the CR-V, and it felt too long, especially for it's lack of height. The Escape got the nod for power, but it felt incredibly wide while driving, and I don't like some of the MPG figures I've been hearing about. That and I can't get the MP3 player in it without going to the Midnight Package which I don't want.
SUV insurance is not high just because of 4WD. When an SUV hits something, or gets hit it causes a great deal of damage. When there's more damage, the repair costs are higher thus we pay inflated insurance premiums. Maybe that doesn't apply to these smaller SUV's as much because of their lineage, but they're just about as unstable if driven improperly.
scape2: Sales data has shown that some early CR-V owners(97,98) have traded in for 02. Surveys have shown that these are loyal & satisfied owners who traded up to newer,improved model. Time will tell whether Ford will build a following for Escape in light of reputation which they admit has been tarnished.
THe CR-V and Escape,although cross over occurs,each have their pros & cons,and,as I've stated,if it were not for the consistant quality issues,I would have chosen the Tribute for it's looks,power & features.
I have also talked to many people who have traded in their Jeeps,Durangos,& Explorers for CR-V's for different reasons, not the least of which are economy,insurance and downsizing to more car like ride & handling AND reliability.
BTW, as has been mentioned numerous times,sales are not an indication of quality,but large shifts in sales often is a result of owner satisfaction/dissatisfaction.
Lastly, why is it that Ford always seems to react to problems only AFTER widespread issues have been well publicized(tires,engine stalling,etc.)?
Scape2 - Would you please enlighten us as to why this would matter?
The Forrester seems to have enough grunt, but ti's got the same problem as the CR-V...it's too long and not tall enough.
I'm actually considering the Matrix/Vibe as SUV's at this point...albeit REALLY short ones in both height and length. But again...not enough horses, and their max torque RPM is too high to help.
No Suzuki, Isuzu, or Mazda dealers around here, which sucks..the nearest Hyundai is too far for me to be comfortable with warranty work, and the Chevy Tracker, while it feels pretty good as a vehicle, has REALLY narrow seats...my [non-permissible content removed] doesn't fit.
The Aztek doesn't count as an SUV...it's a minivan. I could get by the looks, but I do NOT want a minivan.
Where does that leave me, other than a Kia? (LOL!)
I actually considered it for quite a while....it doesn't feel underpowered and it handled pretty good...very similarly to a Chevy Tracker, actually. But my uncle sells auto parts...he can't get Kia parts. And I've heard MANY a horror story about those Sportages on these boards. No thanks. Figures the vehicle that feels close to perfect might not make it from the dealer to my apartment.
So, I'm waiting for the Mitsubishi Outlander to come out, and hoping it's got the right engine/tranny mix to at least give it the feeling of power. Otherwise I'm going to count the VW GTI 1.8T as a REALLY height-and-length-challenged SUV with traction control.
Sad, isn't it? So many mini-utes, and NONE of them is quite what I want. I want a short-length, tall-height vehicle with a decent amount of horses or better, and comfortable inside, with AWD, or at least FWD (Though if it's rear-drive, I WANT AWD). None of them quite fit the bill at this point.
Too bad the Jetta wagon doesn't have VW's 4Motion deal...you have to go up to the Passat for that, and that's out of my price range. Maybe the redesign of the Golf/Jetta platform for 2003 will bring 4Motion, now that the Matrix/Vibe are available with it.
npalad - did you test drive Suzuki's? They have a pretty good selection of smaller SUV's that are every bit as good as Toyota or Honda. Take a peak into the room here at Edmunds, generally people are satisfied. Take a test drive, it can't hurt. Also try the Saturn VUE. Good luck in your hunt..
(I know, I could look it up...)
All this, of course, is assuming that you are correct. I do know several CR-V owners who traded up, but I don't see significant numbers to prove your theory. I see more people waiting to trade up for the Pilot.
npaladin2000: Who are we kidding, all these mini-utes are mini vans, they just shape them different. I'm hoping to buy a CRV in the next 2 weeks. Look at the profile....it's a mini van. I just keep telling myself its not.
As for Saturn...there's a dealer here, but I'm not sure I like the VUE's styling, though I'm pretty curious about how a CVT feels. Maybe I will take a trip over there at some point.
As to the Jetta not getting 4Motion...well, the the Jetta, like the New Beetle, is built on the Golf/GTI platform, so if the Golf might get it, the rest of the Golf platform stuff might get it if they stay on the same platform. But I like the Golf and GTI better than the Jetta anyway. I'm gonna have to keep an eye on that website, since I had completely forgotten about VWs until about a week ago. Apparently, so did Toyota and GM, since they claim the Vibe/Matrix are the first cars in the segment the Golf/GTI already fill.