I think those forecasts are a bit pessimistic. The class as a whole keeps growing, and Yes people will buy anything with an H on the front, so I predict the CR-V will maybe maintain the current level of sales, with maybe a small drop, but no more than 10%. They'll keep sales over 100k, sustained, I'm guessing.
Much better pics. Bigger, too.
The lines of the grills appear more parallel, that looks slightly better.
Still too many themes going on, though. The grille is all Pilot, but the hood still looks open and why do the lights spill down into the opening?
Then there is one too many seams where the hood lifts, why not just lift the grille with the hood?
I can see that they tried to make the front bumper look shaved, but then it should have been better integrated into the body.
The black cladding around the bottom isn't exactly pretty but it's highly functional, the bumps probably add strength to stop dings.
Fog light blanks look cheap.
Moonroof looks smallish.
Those tires stink, I had a set. But the current CR-V has two tire choices so it might still offer a BFG tire.
Bump at the shoulder level on the rear hatch looks odd. Kills the smooth flow. Wonder why they did that?
Likes? Rims are nice, door handles and mirrors are body color. Black cladding does add a visual lift. Locking fuel door cover. Tint looks nice, seems darker but that's probably the smaller greenhouse. Rear discs. Headlights look 3D, still hard to tell.
Overall, it's definitely softer. Less SUV and more van-ish, more crossover than truck. I bet there will be a higher percentage of female buyers, which isn't a bad thing.
I just saw the undisguised photos 5 minutes ago for the first time. My immediate reaction is very positive—much more so than when I saw masked mules. I think it will do well. I like it better than the Acura RDX.
I need to study them further—and I need to learn what the specs are.
Re: the bottom edge of the liftgate... apparently, its a separate, easy to replace, plastic piece, same as on the RDX, so while it's vulnerable, it shouldn't be too expensive to repair.
It has been lowered and the wheels pushed out, so the driving dynamics of this should be a lot better than its predecessor, which wasn't a beauty show queen either.
My gloomy forecast was based in large part on several rumors about a smaller interior. If that rumor turns out to be true, I'll stick by it. Nothing that is small and ugly sells well. However, if this new rumor is true*, it has a much better chance.
* TOV has since taken down the entire thread where the new rumor was posted.
I've just gotten tired of receiving personal attacks for comments made about a car. If people dislike my opinions about a car, they can argue with what I'm writing. Prove me wrong. Don't get uppity about my credibility.
Anyway, I certainly hope this new rumor about cargo space is true. That was one of the key features of the 1st and 2nd generation models. As mentioned above, the thread where that post was written has been taken down. Possibly because the poster was incorrect and didn't want to spread a bad rumor. Or because they thought the remarks were too close to a violation of the press embargo.
A third row seat is very unlikely. I've seen nothing reliable which would support that addition.
You guys keep saying that the sparetire is under the floor... Do you mean as in a sedan? I believe it is under the body the CRV. The front should be fixed!! My favorite feature of the 06 Crv was the flip up glass and it seems it is gone for 2007
:surprise: Now added to the "Bangle Butt" Bmw is the "Strangle Nose" CRV! :mad: Where has all the good stylists gone?
This CR-V is based on the same platform as the RDX. They are going to share many architectural features. The RDX has a donut spare under floor of the cargo area (like a sedan). It's a good bet the CR-V will, too. Making it different would be very costly for very little benefit.
There's a "hondasuv" site which has about 5 uncovered pix from Vancouver....I couldn't view them but one was posted on the "quebeccrv" site....showed a sideview at the back of an LX model...no tint, steel wheels (but thankfully) painted bumpers, but I couldn't make out the tailgate bulge. Maybe it was the angle but I thought I should be albe to see at least part of it. Would the EX and LX have different tailgates?
:P I was hopping for a Hybrid model CR-V this year and a return to the first generation styling. Three more years to go, lets hope they get it right by then, JMHO.
Re: the bottom edge of the liftgate... apparently, its a separate, easy to replace, plastic piece, same as on the RDX, so while it's vulnerable, it shouldn't be too expensive to repair.
But why should you have to deal with this issue at all? It's not a question of being cheap to repair. It's an issue of not having it damaged in the first place. The way it stands any type of rear-ender is likely to result in a damaged tailgate—which may or may not mean the tailgate will close properly...
It looks like the CR-V will sell well with this redesign despite the front-bumper problem. From all other angles it looks much better than its predecessor (which was decidedly boring). The interior is vastly improved in terms of space, features, and materials. I'm sure that it will sell at least as well as the 2006 model. Do not mistake this for the Ridgeline. The Ridgeline was Honda's first truck and made a lot of gambles all at once. This vehicle has a proven track record and is bound to be more fun to drive than the current model. Hopefully they will fix the front end too. As for space... most people don't measure interior space by cubic feet. While cubic feet is a consideration, in general more people look at the vehicle, see its dimensions and judge whether the useful space is good enough for their needs. Seeing as Honda is not doing anything major in this regard and the fact that it will actually get wider, they are sure to have a winner on their hands. Hopefully we'll see some numbers for gas mileage soon.
I wonder if people are dissaponted by the new Civic? Does it resemble previous generations or is it a radical departure? Whatever people think it hasn't hurt it's sales.
For me I can see Honda family influences in their current vehicles that go back to the 80's or even earlier. But vehicle design evolves. Cars become more aerodynamic, the amount of glass increases, the grill changes shape, etc. but it still looks like a Honda, at least to me. Maybe the new CR-V won't win a beauty contest but I think it's quality, reliability, utility etc. will still be up to the usual Honda standards. Don't pronounce this model DOA, certainly not before it is released and you see it in person.
"The way it stands any type of rear-ender is likely to result in a damaged tailgate—which may or may not mean the tailgate will close properly..."
There are many things you can tell about a design by looking at it. I dunno that this is one of them.
I mean, sure, the back might get dented. But for all we know this is the best design for passenger safety that has ever been built. Or perhaps having the gate reach the edge of the bumper makes it more aerodynamic, less heavy, more spacious, more stylish, and grants easier access to the cargo area (saving people chiropractor bills). Maybe the plastic panel can be ripped off making it MORE likely you can close the gate compared with designs that have steel sheetmetal in that area.
Or maybe it is the worst design ever. I just don't think you can judge something like that by looking at it.
"I think most agree it looks like a bulked up 1G CR-V."
I owned a 1st gen CR-V. This new one looks nothing like it.
The 96-01 models were styled with straight lines and soft edges. This new one avoids any straight lines and the edges have been softened to the point of not being there.
The first gen had rectangular shapes up front in the grill, headlights, and a grill that was little more than a simple black box with a small Honda logo in it. This new one has several competing shapes going on... tear drop lights, a whale's mouth for a grill, and a large chrome mustache with a large Honda emblem stuck in it.
"The interior is vastly improved in terms of space, features, and materials."
Were you at the press event? Because what you're writing doesn't jive with everything else I've read. Most of what I'm hearing is that the interior is slightly smaller. Whether it is slightly smaller of significantly smaller has yet to be determined. Nobody is saying the interior is "vastly improved" in terms of space.
I am certain that feature and materials will be much better. Of course, that probably means a higher price tag, which is something I hesitate to call an improvement.
"I pronounce it UIF - Ugly In Front!"
That's really the worst part about this. The rest of it looks very good. But that nose pretty much condemns it.
"The way it stands any type of rear-ender is likely to result in a damaged tailgate—which may or may not mean the tailgate will close properly..."
It's gotta be better than a big spare tire there to absorb all the impact into the rear hatch.
of the design. The side profile is nice. It looks more upscale than its predecessor. I'm starting to like the back a little. It looks quite nice actually.
Maybe the new CR-V won't win a beauty contest but I think it's quality, reliability, utility etc. will still be up to the usual Honda standards.
Yes I agree about the quality, reliability, resale, etc. but as someone who planned to to buy a 2007 CRV to replace a 2004 model I cannot think of any justification for creating an ugly car (front end - rest is fine) CRV buyers are not trying to buy the buy the "beauty contest" winner but no one wants an ugly car. Remember when the dealers would park the Aztecs behind the dealership? There is just no excuse for putting out a new product that looks that bad
CRV's much better than average reliability was because they were made in Japan; does anyone know if 2007 CRV's will be made in North America? :confuse:
actually CR-V is made in two places, Japan and Swindon, England.
We think that the 2007 will still be made in the same mfg plant as the 2006's however, Honda is starting a mfg line here in the US. Don't know if the 2007 will be made here or not.
CRV's much better than average reliability was because they were made in Japan.
Not necessarily...our 2003 Accord EX was made in Japan, and likely could have been declared a lemon. My dad's 2005 (54k miles now) and my 1996 and 2006 Accords (162k and 8k miles, respectively) are all basically trouble free and were built in the Ohio plant. Knock on wood, but my repair costs on my old Accord are well below (i'm talking hundreds) $1,000 for the life of the car so far.
Do you routinely sit and stare at the front of your vehicle and ponder it's beauty? Do you think other people will find it "ugly" as they see you drive by? You've driven Hondas before that wouldn't be characterized as beautiful. Overreaction to the styling is running rampant.
Do you routinely sit and stare at the front of your vehicle and ponder it's beauty?
Well, not routinely, but humans are "sight hunters," so curb appeal counts, I think. In a tight market where the choice is between good/good, not good/bad, an irrational like/dislike can tilt the decision one way or another.
The other day, I had four female members of the famn damily and two guys in my computer room, and we did a highly scientific survey: "Here's a pic of the '07 CR-V. Do you like it better than the '05 in the driveway?" Both guys (I'm one of them) preferred the unadorned '05 style. All the members of the female persuasion liked the '07. So maybe Honda knows what it's doing.
They get the CR-V. We get the Pilot and Ridgeline.
I still think 170 as there are rumors they will tweak the engine to gain a few more horses. I think they did that on the rav4 which uses a camry motor but rates higher HP than the camry. :confuse:
Until we get an announcement from Honda its all rumors anyways. I just hope they find some way to out do the rav4s mpg. Can we assume it will have a 5 speed auto trans?
I think the designer of the 2007 CR-V must be a pretty boy who stands in front of a mirror all day long saying to himself how pretty he looks. I also think that Honda took a back ward step, by not coming out this year with a CR-V Hybrid that can be used as a toad and recharge it bat tries while being towed. I have a 1998 EX and think it is one of the best and most reliable CR-V's built. The thing I like most about it, is that it is very utilitarian and can be towed and gets very good gas mileage, but a towable Hybrid would have been even better and a utilitarian design would have played up to it's role as a great all around outdoor vehicle. Just my thoughts on the subject.
"Do you routinely sit and stare at the front of your vehicle and ponder it's beauty? Do you think other people will find it "ugly" as they see you drive by? You've driven Hondas before that wouldn't be characterized as beautiful. Overreaction to the styling is running rampant."
Tell it to Pontiac and the two people who bought the Aztec SUV. 'Nuf said. California is a big market for the CR-V, and Californians are pretty picky on being at least non-offensive, and preferrably trendy, in their vehicles. To a large extent, you ARE what you drive out here. I owned a 2003 CR-V; I would hesitate to buy the 2007.
Yes, exterior matters to the buyer. And come to think of it, the Aztec had a split front end look as well.
The 2007 CR-V on the 3rd generation will have the following features which were not available on the 2nd generation: Telescopic Steering Wheel, Bi-Level Digital Readout Instrument Panel, Center Console with: Floor Shifter, Extra Large Storage Compartment and Cupholders, Variable Intermitent Windshield Wipers, Automatic Climate Control System on EX and EX-L and Daytime Running Lights!!! This info comes from a Dealership Pre-Order Fact Sheet!!! Enjoy!!!
The CR-V looks like it going the way of the latest trend these days, a crossover vehicle. Slowly the car makers are working their way back to the station wagon.
I think people are making too much of the front end of this vehicle. The civic and accord easily have much less appealing front ends than the 07 CR-V in my opinion. The vehicle does look more refined and the new instrument cluster will be "civic" like. After seeing a few of the blue tint instrument clusters I think that style is beginning to grow on me. I'm fighting my natural inclination to resist change.
Actually, the Rav4s new size put it within an inch of the outgoing CR-V. Before it was over a foot shorter, 167 inches in length, I believe. I wouldn't think Honda would shrink the length much if at all.
The 2002-2006 CR-V length is 181 inches. The new RAV4s length is 181.1 inches.
Purely speculation here, but since the latest Honda models with leather are equipped with XM radio, I would expect the EX-L CR-V (top-level trim) to have XM radio, but wouldn't expect it on lesser models.
The 2007 CR-V has a 104.3 in. wheelbase, up 1 inch from 2006. The cargo hold, with the back seats folded flat, is down to 61 cubic feet vs. 72 cubic feet in the 2006! Minimum Ground Clearance is also down to 5.12 inches vs. 8.1 inches in the 2006! The roof line is also lower 1.5 inches less at it's highest point up front and 3.4 inches lower in the rear compared to the 2006! The Interior will be upgraded, though, compared to the 2006! Overall the lower chasis will translate to a better handling vehilcle with a sportier feel and smoother ride! A DVD and Navigation setup will be offered in upscale models! I hope this info will help you until the official release date comes along, just a little over 2 months" The Plastic Grill just below the Hood Overhang that resembles a smile may incorporate 3 horizontal fins 'BLACKENED OUT' on lower models or on all final production models, depending on final management decisions"
Yeah, this is the info that had me thinking the CR-V was going to flop in a big way. Small cargo, no clearance, smaller cargo opening, etc.
But I'm now hearing these figures are half-truth. The wheelbase and other items (which can be assumed from the RDX) are likely correct.
However, the rest of it is very suspect. For example, the cargo space (based on a report from someone who attended the press release) is supposedly very similar in volume to the current model, just shaped differently.
Comments
Much better pics. Bigger, too.
The lines of the grills appear more parallel, that looks slightly better.
Still too many themes going on, though. The grille is all Pilot, but the hood still looks open and why do the lights spill down into the opening?
Then there is one too many seams where the hood lifts, why not just lift the grille with the hood?
I can see that they tried to make the front bumper look shaved, but then it should have been better integrated into the body.
The black cladding around the bottom isn't exactly pretty but it's highly functional, the bumps probably add strength to stop dings.
Fog light blanks look cheap.
Moonroof looks smallish.
Those tires stink, I had a set. But the current CR-V has two tire choices so it might still offer a BFG tire.
Bump at the shoulder level on the rear hatch looks odd. Kills the smooth flow. Wonder why they did that?
Likes? Rims are nice, door handles and mirrors are body color. Black cladding does add a visual lift. Locking fuel door cover. Tint looks nice, seems darker but that's probably the smaller greenhouse. Rear discs. Headlights look 3D, still hard to tell.
Overall, it's definitely softer. Less SUV and more van-ish, more crossover than truck. I bet there will be a higher percentage of female buyers, which isn't a bad thing.
-juice
Nice catch, I missed that.
I wonder if they did that to get a really low cargo floor? For easy loading, or so a small dog can just hop in?
Let's see how they crammed the donut under there, though. With that hump-back hatch they could almost have put the spare inside there.
-juice
I need to study them further—and I need to learn what the specs are.
Bob
:shades:
Re: the bottom edge of the liftgate...
apparently, its a separate, easy to replace, plastic piece, same as on the RDX, so while it's vulnerable, it shouldn't be too expensive to repair.
It has been lowered and the wheels pushed out, so the driving dynamics of this should be a lot better than its predecessor, which wasn't a beauty show queen either.
I'd vote that sales will be fine...
* TOV has since taken down the entire thread where the new rumor was posted.
Anyway, I certainly hope this new rumor about cargo space is true. That was one of the key features of the 1st and 2nd generation models. As mentioned above, the thread where that post was written has been taken down. Possibly because the poster was incorrect and didn't want to spread a bad rumor. Or because they thought the remarks were too close to a violation of the press embargo.
A third row seat is very unlikely. I've seen nothing reliable which would support that addition.
:surprise: Now added to the "Bangle Butt" Bmw is the "Strangle Nose" CRV!
:mad: Where has all the good stylists gone?
Pardon me. TOV has simply moved the thread from one forum to another.
Dan
apparently, its a separate, easy to replace, plastic piece, same as on the RDX, so while it's vulnerable, it shouldn't be too expensive to repair.
But why should you have to deal with this issue at all? It's not a question of being cheap to repair. It's an issue of not having it damaged in the first place. The way it stands any type of rear-ender is likely to result in a damaged tailgate—which may or may not mean the tailgate will close properly...
That's dumb design.
Bob
If you like that type of boxy styling there's the Pilot. I think most agree it looks like a bulked up 1G CR-V.
As for space... most people don't measure interior space by cubic feet. While cubic feet is a consideration, in general more people look at the vehicle, see its dimensions and judge whether the useful space is good enough for their needs. Seeing as Honda is not doing anything major in this regard and the fact that it will actually get wider, they are sure to have a winner on their hands. Hopefully we'll see some numbers for gas mileage soon.
For me I can see Honda family influences in their current vehicles that go back to the 80's or even earlier. But vehicle design evolves. Cars become more aerodynamic, the amount of glass increases, the grill changes shape, etc. but it still looks like a Honda, at least to me. Maybe the new CR-V won't win a beauty contest but I think it's quality, reliability, utility etc. will still be up to the usual Honda standards. Don't pronounce this model DOA, certainly not before it is released and you see it in person.
I pronounce it UIF - Ugly In Front!
There are many things you can tell about a design by looking at it. I dunno that this is one of them.
I mean, sure, the back might get dented. But for all we know this is the best design for passenger safety that has ever been built. Or perhaps having the gate reach the edge of the bumper makes it more aerodynamic, less heavy, more spacious, more stylish, and grants easier access to the cargo area (saving people chiropractor bills). Maybe the plastic panel can be ripped off making it MORE likely you can close the gate compared with designs that have steel sheetmetal in that area.
Or maybe it is the worst design ever. I just don't think you can judge something like that by looking at it.
I owned a 1st gen CR-V. This new one looks nothing like it.
The 96-01 models were styled with straight lines and soft edges. This new one avoids any straight lines and the edges have been softened to the point of not being there.
The first gen had rectangular shapes up front in the grill, headlights, and a grill that was little more than a simple black box with a small Honda logo in it. This new one has several competing shapes going on... tear drop lights, a whale's mouth for a grill, and a large chrome mustache with a large Honda emblem stuck in it.
"The interior is vastly improved in terms of space, features, and materials."
Were you at the press event? Because what you're writing doesn't jive with everything else I've read. Most of what I'm hearing is that the interior is slightly smaller. Whether it is slightly smaller of significantly smaller has yet to be determined. Nobody is saying the interior is "vastly improved" in terms of space.
I am certain that feature and materials will be much better. Of course, that probably means a higher price tag, which is something I hesitate to call an improvement.
"I pronounce it UIF - Ugly In Front!"
That's really the worst part about this. The rest of it looks very good. But that nose pretty much condemns it.
It's gotta be better than a big spare tire there to absorb all the impact into the rear hatch.
what was honda thinking?
Except for...
The front! I hate the front.
I owned a 1st gen CR-V. This new one looks nothing like it.
I believe he was saying that the PILOT looks like a bulked-up 1G CR-V.
Bob
Yes I agree about the quality, reliability, resale, etc. but as someone who planned to to buy a 2007 CRV to replace a 2004 model I cannot think of any justification for creating an ugly car (front end - rest is fine) CRV buyers are not trying to buy the buy the "beauty contest" winner but no one wants an ugly car. Remember when the dealers would park the Aztecs behind the dealership? There is just no excuse for putting out a new product that looks that bad
If yes CRV should outperform the RAV4 as it only has 165 HP; while the RAV4 V6 engine has serious torque steer problem.
We think that the 2007 will still be made in the same mfg plant as the 2006's however, Honda is starting a mfg line here in the US. Don't know if the 2007 will be made here or not.
Not necessarily...our 2003 Accord EX was made in Japan, and likely could have been declared a lemon. My dad's 2005 (54k miles now) and my 1996 and 2006 Accords (162k and 8k miles, respectively) are all basically trouble free and were built in the Ohio plant. Knock on wood, but my repair costs on my old Accord are well below (i'm talking hundreds) $1,000 for the life of the car so far.
I sure hope Honda releases spy pixs of the interior soon. I want to see if they have the "Civic" like dash in it.
Do you routinely sit and stare at the front of your vehicle and ponder it's beauty? Do you think other people will find it "ugly" as they see you drive by? You've driven Hondas before that wouldn't be characterized as beautiful. Overreaction to the styling is running rampant.
Well, not routinely, but humans are "sight hunters," so curb appeal counts, I think. In a tight market where the choice is between good/good, not good/bad, an irrational like/dislike can tilt the decision one way or another.
The other day, I had four female members of the famn damily and two guys in my computer room, and we did a highly scientific survey: "Here's a pic of the '07 CR-V. Do you like it better than the '05 in the driveway?" Both guys (I'm one of them) preferred the unadorned '05 style. All the members of the female persuasion liked the '07. So maybe Honda knows what it's doing.
They get the CR-V. We get the Pilot and Ridgeline.
Until we get an announcement from Honda its all rumors anyways.
I just hope they find some way to out do the rav4s mpg.
Can we assume it will have a 5 speed auto trans?
Dan
Tell it to Pontiac and the two people who bought the Aztec SUV. 'Nuf said. California is a big market for the CR-V, and Californians are pretty picky on being at least non-offensive, and preferrably trendy, in their vehicles. To a large extent, you ARE what you drive out here. I owned a 2003 CR-V; I would hesitate to buy the 2007.
Yes, exterior matters to the buyer. And come to think of it, the Aztec had a split front end look as well.
I have both of those in my 2005 CR-V EX 5M.
I think people are making too much of the front end of this vehicle. The civic and accord easily have much less appealing front ends than the 07 CR-V in my opinion.
The vehicle does look more refined and the new instrument cluster will be "civic" like. After seeing a few of the blue tint instrument clusters I think that style is beginning to grow on me.
I'm fighting my natural inclination to resist change.
I have...(that)...in my 2005 CR-V EX 5M.
Were they not referring to an Automatic transmission I presume?
The 2002-2006 CR-V length is 181 inches. The new RAV4s length is 181.1 inches.
The Plastic Grill just below the Hood Overhang that resembles a smile may incorporate 3 horizontal fins 'BLACKENED OUT' on lower models or on all final production models, depending on final management decisions"
THE NEW CRV IS BEIN BUILT IN LIBERTY, OH.
But I'm now hearing these figures are half-truth. The wheelbase and other items (which can be assumed from the RDX) are likely correct.
However, the rest of it is very suspect. For example, the cargo space (based on a report from someone who attended the press release) is supposedly very similar in volume to the current model, just shaped differently.
But that's unconfirmed, as well.
http://www.thecarconnection.com/Enthusiasts/Spy_Shots/Spy_Shots_2007_Honda_CR-V.- - - S178.A10595.html
http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/06/29/2007-honda-cr-v-caught-without-disguise/