By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
-juice
The shifter position is excellent. It does not interfere with any of the other controls on the dash, including climate controls. The climate controls are terrific. I don't even have to look at the dash to make adjustments.
The EPA uses a single standard for every car they test. When testing manual transmissions, they use a set speed to determine when to up-shift. I dunno what they are, but the first shift might come at 20 or 25 mph. So, if one car is geared high (numerically low), they may only wind up the engine to 2,500 rpms before they shift. If the car has short, close ratio gears, they may wind it up to 3,500 rpms before they shift. The higher revving hurts fuel economy.
In real life, the driver is more likely to shift based on engine rpms than miles per hour. So the EPA estimates for short geared cars tend to be pessimistic. I'm told that this is one reason why VW installed those up-shift lights in their cars. They convinced the EPA to use those indicators rather than the "set speed" model. Of course, it also works both ways. For example, EPA estimates for the Insight were very high (they probably used the up-shift indicator). Meanwhile, real life driving results in lower figures. Possibly because the drivers use their ears to determine engine rpms and shifted then, rather than the shiftpoints indicated by the dash lights.
I've been following the Forester XT thread closely (that's the new turbo model). EPA numbers are poor, 18/23 mpg. Oddly enough Subaru put in a shorter final drive, 4.44:1 vs. 4.1:1 for the normally aspirated models.
But real-world numbers are much better, most are getting 21-24mpg overall. Why? You shift sooner, you just don't need a lot of revs with the torque it produces and the short gearing.
The EPA would have you think you're losing 3-4 mpg by going with that model, but it's actually about half that, 2mpg or so.
-juice
Honda Element: Prices Paid & Buying Experience
Steve, Host
My wife hated it too, I happen to like it. Guess who wears the pants? LOL
-juice
Honda transplants have had good quality, I would not be that concerned.
mtngal: you've been shopping for 2-3 years, you ever gonna buy anything?
-juice
< /shaking head >
rockymtnelement...great to hear that wind noise is not a major factor. hey, from your handle, are you in CO? good buying experience? any dealer that you would recommend?
still looking for any scoop on changes forthcoming in the '04 E? worth the wait, or pull the trigger now?
2 months ago I was happy, starting to make plans on what I was going to buy this fall. Now I'm back to keeping my eye out on what is new and might fit my needs better than either the Element or one of the Subies (the current choices). I was all ready to test drive the Forester XT and then really decide, but I think I'll wait until I can see the way clear of the latest setbacks.
I'm leaning more toward the Element right now (after wanting a WRX or an Outback all spring). The WRX and the Forester XT are not off the radar though, and in the back of my mind the Jeeps just won't go away.
It will be interesting to see if we can shake all this off and get our act together enough to dump the Taco in the spring. Since I've been through this a couple of times, I'm not as positive it will work out. Ah well, I guess I'll just practice some of that patience they tell me that people aquire as they get older (somehow I don't think there was something they leaving out, though).
120k in less than 3 years? Do you live in your truck? Yowsah.
I would really focus on running costs, then. Things like fuel efficiency will make a big difference in overall costs. Check out a Civic Hybrid. Too bad they don't make a wagon version...
Also look at the auto CR-V and Forester XS, both are fuel efficient. WRX and XT run on premium, so if you're going to keep the pace of 40k per year or more, I'd think twice.
-juice
I've looked at the hybrids with longing, but they don't come in 4x4 or AWD (not an absolute necessity since the Taco is a 2WD - we just drive the Wrangler when the roads get bad in winter) and I'm afraid they would be underpowered for my uphill climb in the evenings (sea level to almost 6,000 feet). I've thought about the hybrid Escape, and will check one out if I haven't bought something else before they come out.
We don't like the CR-V, I worry about an auto, though a Honda salesman was saying that current autos don't hunt like they used to (I went through 2 Nissan auto trannys the first year we moved to the mountains, but it was an '88). That's why the Subies and the Element are high on my list - I can get a 5 speed, AWD and some nice amenities.
I did some math when I first started looking at the WRX. It would give me the power to get up the steep part of my commute without downshifting to 4th (something I have to do with 4 cylinders), so it would be comparable (actually better than) a V6. If I compare the WRX gas mileage with premium (assuming a 20 cent difference between regular and premium) and a V6 mileage with regular, the WRX comes out a bit cheaper.
While I would love to easily fly up the steep part of the freeway, I'm not sure it is worth giving up the practical interior of the Element, and having to buy premium.
I've also considered the diesel Jetta Wagon, but I understand they won't be available here.
Why don't they make a jet powered Element that gets 60 mpg? I'd buy that in a heartbeat!
If it weren't for such a nifty interior on the Element I might not be looking at it because I prefer an AWD system that splits the power all the time, rather than only when the wheels slip. I've seen many stuck CR-Vs around my area, but no stuck Subarus.
On the other hand, I do have the Wrangler for deeper snow. When the snow is so deep that the Wrangler gets high centered(which happened one morning) I know it is time to stay home!
Usually it's a soft flour tortilla folded in half and filled with meat, cheese, lettuce and tomatoes.
What??!! C'mon it was sitting there just begging for a wise answer.
As for what mtngal drives, me thinks a Tahoe.
CR-V is very similar, you guys must really like the Element's style and function.
At 6000 ft, you will be quite happy with a turbo. At that altitude N/A engines are wheezing, turbos just bleed off less boost but make full power.
-juice
I wasn't sure I would be happy with the power of a 4 cylinder, but one of my neighbors has an Element AWD automatic and hasn't had any problem with power at all. When I test drove the 5 speed FWD I was impressed with the way it was geared. I think it would be acceptable, and since it seems to have plenty of power at lower rpms, it won't be so scary getting on the freeway (the Taco can be scary at times - it is a 4 banger).
By the way, I have another neighbor who has a WRX. He often blows by me in the afternoons (as I struggle to maintain 70 in 4th gear), so I know I wouldn't have any problems with it.
We are having a huge thunderstorm at the moment and I've discovered a disadantage of DirecTV - no signal. More fun to read about cars, anyway!
tidester, host
just thought you'd like to know.
tidester, host
Can someone with the auto (FWD) tell me how many rpm's it's pulling at 70.
Thanks.
only concerns are the double doors and getting into and out of the backseat.
1. since there is no pillar where the doors meet, you didn't the traditional "thunk" of closing a door. it seemed like you had to apply a little extra force for a clean shut...it just wasn't very crisp. thoughts?
2. getting into and out of the backseats is interesting. you have to open both doors to do it. we have a family of 4, so we will always be loading/unloading from back there. is it something you just get used to? any feedback?
there's a lot to like about this vehicle...just trying to learn more about experiences.
the dealer didn't divulge much about '04...still wondering if anyone else has heard wha't changing.
How much inconvenience do you want to put up with? That's a question each individual has to answer for themselves.
-juice
If you are "constantly" letting people in and out of the rear seat, then the Element is a poor choice of vehicle.
-juice
In Japan Honda billed the Stream as a seven-seater coupe. Very silly.
-juice
Re: next year's Element, I called the toll free "(800) 33-HONDA" number yesterday.
They said that based on info they've had since July, that the DX should stay the same. As for the EX, keyless remote and passenger side armrest will be added. I think another item was mentioned---I think new interior plastic for the "A" pillar?
(I actually called to find out more about the '04 CR-V, which leads me to my next post...)
IIHS Side Impact Tests - The Element scored a "Poor" rating while the CR-V at least got a "Marginal" score.
Seating Design - The CR-V has the rear bench that slides forward, so that I can reach my toddler easier to hand or take away things easier. The Element ironically seems too spacious. When I sit in the driver's seat, the right rear seat seems so far away.
Car Seat Placement - The CR-V allows for a center rear car seat...safer I think than the Element's rear seats, which don't offer the center placement option.
Well, those are the main reasons. Can anyone help me out? Anything I haven't thought of, that could bring me back into the Element camp? I want my Element!!! :-)
Herb
(BTW, if we do end up with the CR-V, I'm considering replacing the 15" rims with 16" ones, lowering the car by 1.8", and stiffening the suspension. My goal is to have a CR-V that comes close to how the Element handles. Does anyone have any thoughts about that?)
This type of accident might be rare that both doors in the front are jammed, but why would you want a back door to open into traffic and if hit would be pushed back into you? A risky situation.
Most accidents are front or rear collisions anyways. Not all side impacts are avoidable but I would place those at the more avoidable side of the accident spectrum. Don't turn out in front of anyone and look before you cross an intersection.
Besides, if you are going to drive in constant fear of having an accident you might as well not drive because crap happens and you can be killed in anything. Recently a 14 year old girl was killed when a work truck hit the Excursion she was in. Everyone else survived without serious injury excluding the driver of the work truck that hit them.
Since most accidents are frontal or rear collisions, to be hit from the rear could block your rear exit and pinch the doors shut.
Why look at the IIHS tests at all since if you are hit hard enough you can be killed in anything? That's like saying.... Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?
Those doors present a danger to the occupants of that vehicle!
...but since they are getting the EX, that means a big sunroof. Who needs doors?
Now for the important stuff:
Besides the keyless entry and passenger side arm-rest, it there anything else they are adding to the EX?
Could someone with a FWD automatic please tell me what kind of RPM's you are pulling at 70 MPH.
Thanks!
Does the E have enough get and and go? Can you merge on the freeway or does this thing accelerate like an old VW microbus?( I know, nothing is that slow) I have no desire to race anyone, but is the 2.4l big enough. I like the vehicle's size and interior but the engine size has me apprehensive. I guess I'll have to go drive one. Any comments would be helpful.
Best thing to do is test for yourself. Also, take it up a hill.