2012 Honda CR-V Long Term Road Test

Edmunds.comEdmunds.com Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 10,316
edited September 2014 in Honda

image2012 Honda CR-V Long Term Road Test

We test out our 2012 Honda CR-V's family utility for 24 hours.

Read the full story here


Tagged:

Comments

  • stovt001_stovt001_ Member Posts: 799
    There's a lot to be said for the humble NA 4 cyl, seeing how the vaunted turbocharged downsized 4 cyls are falling flat on their face in real world fuel economy.

    At the same time, that is a little disappointing to see only 25 MPG, as that's what we average in our V6 powered 2004 Taurus wagon, which has about as much utility as the CR-V.
  • duck87duck87 Member Posts: 649
    The turbo 4's aren't so much falling flat on their face compared to NA 4-bangers; it's against the V6s where you're really seeing the difference. The Accord and Camry are rocketships (do you REALLY need 270+ hp in a midsize sedan?), and yet the fuel economy of these cars are actually really good- for many people it's only a few mpg difference compared to the NA 4-bangers.

    Which goes back to the complaint about the CR-V not having that option =)
  • subytrojan_2subytrojan_2 Member Posts: 79
    Nice write-up, Brent!

    Honda CR-V – What Jack Bauer drives when he's not saving the country.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles

Your Privacy

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.