This is information from different forum. I hope it’s OK to post it but I am not an author.
"Just ordered a new 2007 CRV, but what have I ordered? Is it an SUV or is it a car? I think it is not. Not an SUV and not a car and certainly not a "cross-over" vehicle. You tell me what you think it is.
1. It will not only be the safest vehicle in its class but will be the safest vehicle ever. Reasoning: This is the fourth vehicle Honda has created with the ACE body structure. It is the latest and most refined version and because you do sit up much higher than a car in the new CRV, you can see farther down the road to avoid potential problems. So yes, the Acura RL is the documented king of safety at the moment, but the 2007 CRV is about to take the throne.
2. It may be an economy car. Daily fuel mileage, day in and day out driving will likely bring at least 25 mpg with substantially more on the highway. This is great! I have not owned a V6 or V8 vehicle for some time. With the 2007 CRV there is no need to put yourself in a dangerous tiny on the ground type vehicle to get great gas mileage.
3. It may almost be a sports car. The handling of the 2007 CRV is supposed to be jaw-dropping. With this vehicle, gone are the days of your body fighting gravity on sweeping or tight turns. At least 17 inch tires.
4. It has all of the advantages of an SUV, with none of the disadvantages. Well the disadvantages of SUV ownership are legendary: Dangerous rollover potential, poor fuel mileage, slow, cramped interiors, trucks with campershells made more nice at twice the price, hard ride, terrible handling, terrible turning radius, terrible to park, wears you out to drive them, need to rent a car to actually be comfortable on any longer trip, etc. And then when they address one of these areas you end up with serious compromises like the Nissan F35 or F45 which have no stow capacity--gone--no ride quality--gone. And dangerous blocked views or the big GM versions of SUVs which are just tank trucks in disguise for double money. Really nasty stuff.
5. It is now a luxury vehicle. The level of luxury available on the new CRV is going to put previous CRV owners in shock and new owners will wonder what they have missed. Well they certainly haven't missed this level of comfort. It is really going to be something.
6. RAV4 is no longer in the same class. Yes this famous duel is over. The RAV4 has gone with bulbous sheetmetal, cheap cost cutting cloth interior and 3rd rate foam in the seats, and a gas guzzling V-6 with over 250hp! Outrageous. The old well hey we can't compete with them so we will just compete with ourselves and put motors out of our other vehicles in it. Now the RAV4 is a gas guzzling wallow of a ride except you are sitting on park benches.
If you are considering buying a new 2007 Honda CRV you may well want to consider the following vehicles:
1. Audi S4. You can get the 4WD of the new CRV and the same great handling. Trunk space is not bad. Yes it is a little more cramped, gets terrible fuel mileage, and costs 2 1/2 times more but it is something to consider.
2. Acura RL. Same in the class of its own safety of the ACE body structure, same # 1 in quality from Honda, same rich interior, same great music, same great handling. Sure its double money and you sit three heads lower and the gas mileage can't compare, but it is after all a Honda.
3. Porsche Cayenne S. Same great handling. The new 2007 Honda CRV's equal in looks I must admit. Excellent paint. Lots of options to pay for and make it special that the CRV just includes in it's price. But the downside is of course Porsche's legendary poor build quality and astronomical time in the shop instead of with you behind the wheel problems. Horrid gas mileage. Too big and popped up their so high that it is more of a Hummer type statement to make up for other life's failings than a vehicle that anyone could actually live with. But still at only 4 times the price of the new 2007 Honda CRV you might want to think about it.
Yes, Honda has created a totally new vehicle unlike any vehicle ever created before. A vehicle that literally has it all. Price is not set but I am expecting it to come in at just over $17,500 with a good dealer discount.[This is just in case the head screwed on backwards jibby jab dealers try to pak these puppies beyond the MSRP. I had to put the shock in them] Don't ever never ever pay a dime over MSRP for your new 2007 Honda CRV. Honda will price them right between $22,000 and $26,000 all loaded, cleaned up, taxed, and delivered. Go elswhere if they try to make you pay a dime over that window sticker. Wait till late next year and they will be discounting them as usual.
The SUV, the car, the crossover, are gone. Honda just created the world's first "Planet Safe Transport" vehicle the world's first PSTV--enjoy the trip. "
6. RAV4 is no longer in the same class. Yes this famous duel is over. The RAV4 has gone with bulbous sheetmetal, cheap cost cutting cloth interior and 3rd rate foam in the seats, and a gas guzzling V-6 with over 250hp! Outrageous. The old well hey we can't compete with them so we will just compete with ourselves and put motors out of our other vehicles in it. Now the RAV4 is a gas guzzling wallow of a ride except you are sitting on park benches.
I think the sales later will tell us if this statement is true or not. In my opinion,CRV most likely will not blow RAV4 off just because RAV4 is a Toyota with excellent reputation and reliablity.
BTY,I don't know why Honda fans always hate Toyota, but not really many Toyota fans hate Honda. Maybe I am wrong!! :P
3. It may almost be a sports car. The handling of the 2007 CRV is supposed to be jaw-dropping. With this vehicle, gone are the days of your body fighting gravity on sweeping or tight turns. At least 17 inch tires.
Besides, Honda said the same thing about the Element, how all the weight was due to a reinforced side structure, and then the crash tests were "Marginal". So much for that....
They made the author drink the Kool-Aid. Some of the stuff in that text is just plain absurd. Sports car, LOL. I doubt the Acura RDX will be *that* good.
"gas guzzling V-6" in the RAV4? Really? CR managed just 1 mpg less than the 4 cyldinder CR-V with all that extra power. EPA figures are also very reasonable. Far, far from guzzling.
third row seat I'll never use
But that's why it's optional. A friend owns a Highlander, and 1st graders fit in there just fine. They use the 3rd row all the time. Why not give people a choice? The Pilot is too big for some, the Mazda5 has no AWD option.
Sure, 10 year olds might not fit, but that means they are useful for a whole NINE YEARS, i.e. much longer than the average person keeps their vehicle.
The Rav-4's V6 is one of the most fuel efficient around, better than some manufaturer's 4's. Agree with your 3rd row points as well. Highlander's 3rd row was acutally an afterthought, so while I haven't sat in it, the Rav's is probably somewhat more accomodating. Ist and 2nd row space is not affected, and in most of these designs, the 2nd row slides to give you a compromise of sorts when you're using the third row. We are only a family of 3, so something like a Pilot or full-size minivan makes no sense for us. However, we have 3 nieces/nephews and occasional out of town guests that neccessitates in us taking 2 cars at the present. An economical to run 6-7 passenger vehicle like the Mazda5 or Rav4 will be our next vehicle. The CR-V could've been a contender.....
I know you were just posting from what someone else said, but what that "someone else" was saying sounds like pure Honda sales propaganda! The suggested comparisons are especially ludicrous.
Diesel rumors persist, so hopefully they'll get that over here soon. I think putting it in the CR-V first would be a good idea. The Escape hybrid is too pricey, the Jeep Liberty diesel is being dropped IIRC, so the Saturn Vue Greenline is the only fuel sipper in this class and Honda could clean up with all the import buyers.
The Jeep Liberty diesel is being dropped for one yeah and then it's coming back in '08 with a MB engine that meets the new regs. Or so the rumor mill says.
Then there's this blurb in the news today:
"Sales of the new Honda Civic and other fuel-sipping four-cylinder engine cars were benefiting from high gasoline prices, Fukui said, adding that a shift away from big SUVs was also fanning sales of the CR-V crossover despite its reaching the end of its model life." (Washington Post)
I actually think the current CRV is still a pretty competitive, and attractive vehicle. The mid-cycle upgrades certainly helped greatly. With the factory incentives, I would be really tempted to get one if it had a bit more oomph, and a couple more features, such as power driver seat, auto-off headlights, etc. Nothing major, but items that would make it that much more liveable.
"BTY,I don't know why Honda fans always hate Toyota, but not really many Toyota fans hate Honda. Maybe I am wrong!!"
I think it is because more Honda buyers tend to be more into cars, and like the more that Hondas are more "sporty".
So, since they like cars, the Honda owners tend to speak out more and since Toyota is their closest rival, the result is some perceived (or actual) hate of Toyota. Toyota owners are like most people, they are not into cars, so you do not hear from them.
They are both good, depends on what your preferences are.
Back to the 2007 CRV, I will think it will sell just fine. Not as good as the last generation, but all manufacturers have their ups and downs, even Toyota and Honda.
Power should be fine. It was 156 SAE HP, and they bumped it to 166hp last year, right? Now it's supposed to get 170hp.
If it doesn't gain too much weight that should be adequate to pull it around for most folks. If a buyer wants sportiness they'll send them to an Acura dealership to look at the RDX.
I could not wait for the new V but did wait for the new RAV hoping to get a 3rd row seat. Alas none were available in my area and I really needed the car. Note you do NOT sacrafice leg room on the new RAV. The second seat moves front/back. You can have as much room as you wish when not using the 3rd seat. Also, from what I have read the 3rd seat is a better design and offers more room than in the Highlander; obviously for kids. No doubt a minivan offers more comfort but they are not so 'mini' any more. It was too big for my wife. Plus having the 3rd row for us would been a now and then proposition. We'd rather have something smaller at all times, sacraficing comfort for the kids on those few occasions when the 3rd seat would be used be used. Like I said we ended up without the 3rd row but wish we had it. On the bright side we do get and extra truck underneath the hatch where the seat would have dropped into t he floor. It has already come in handy on vacation. So, yes I think the V may suffer a few sales buy not offering the 3rd seat. On the other hand I think they addressed the hatch opening issue (up/down) which the Toyota overlooked. I must say though I preffered the Rav and old V with the tire on the rear...it looked more truck-like.
I am looking forward to a V6 Hybrid CR-V like the accord engine, that should out pace the Rav for many years to come. I would even settle for a four banger Hybrid like the Civic.
I have heard the '07 CR-V will not be approved for four down towing with the automatic transmission. All previous versions, including the '06, are approved for this, and this appeals greatly to the motorhome crowd. Any ideas?
Honda finally got rid of the spare tire on back. You know how many cars get their fronts damaged on NY city streets because of these spare tires!!!!!!! People back their trucks right over the car behind them.
Whenever I hear about them getting stolen off the backs of these SUVs I am SO HAPPY!
First, let me say that I do think the new RAV4 is probably the best vehicle in this segment today. And I don't think the new CR-V is looking very good on several fronts. But having written that...
People here are acting like there's never been a V6-powered small SUV before. Or one with a 3rd row of seats.
Back in 2000, when Ford introduced the 201 hp Escape/Tribute twins, Honda didn't need to produce a v6 to compete. Saturn released a 250hp Vue a few years back and sales of the CR-V have been fine. Subaru introduced an incredibly fast turbo Forester and got a yawn from the sales floor.
Suzuki has had a third row of seats on the market for several years. Toyota did just fine with the Highlander as a two row vehicle and adding a 3rd didn't significantly boost sales.
A big or powerful engine has never been a strong suit for the CR-V. Yet, the CR-V has consistently been at the top of the food chain without the need for incentives to stay there.
$28K is not out of the question. In fact, I expect that might be a little low.
The MSRP for the 2006 SE is $25,400 plus another $550 for the destination fee (25,950 total).
The 2007 CR-V will likely see a price increase. New models always do. Figure the new top of the line vehicle will go for about $26,850. Adding NAV would put the most expensive model at $28,350.
But, frankly, I think that's being conservative. We keep hearing rumors about new features and how the CR-V will be loaded with technology. I figure prices will range from 21,000 to about 29,000.
If you compare the step up from the Pilot EX-L to the EX-L Navi, there is a jump of 2200 dollars so I would think that the CRV EX-L Navi will probably be somewhere around 28000 to 29000 ( a jump of about 2200 from CRV EX-L MSRP of 26500).
I think we're in agreeance. The RAV4 is not large enough to accommodate a third row. Including one was pure puffery and feature creep on Toyota's part, and I have yet to see one equipped with the optional tiny third row, except in press photos.
I am not familiar with the four-cylinder used in the RAV4 and Camry, but others have indicated that it is not as smooth as Honda's Accord/CRV four-banger. You're right--look at the Accord's history. Honda sold tons of Accords without offering a V6, when the competition did--why would the CRV be different?
While we're talking about the RAV4, I also have a problem with the RAV4's goofy name (as well as the 4Runner). I think it stands for Recreational Active Vehicle with 4-wheel drive. So a 2WD RAV4 should really be called a RAV2, and a 2WD 4Runner should be called a 2Runner.
Another option is that it stands for Recreational Active Vehicle with 4-cylinder engine, in which case there should now be a RAV6, plus a 6Runner and 8Runner.
The only logical alternative is that it stands for Recreational Active Vehicle with 4 wheels--this also makes the 4Runner's name understandable, but I am left wondering why the other models in Toyota's lineup don't feature four wheels. The nameplates featuring four wheels should be called the Camry4, 4Sequoia, Yaris4, 4Tundra, etc...
A Hybrid V6 would likely cost a fortune. Each of those would add $2 grand or so to the bottom line, so imagine a loaded hybrid coming it at $34 grand...
Saturn threw a monkey wrench in the segment by pricing the Vue Green Line lower than expected. At under $23k, it put a lot of pressure on Ford's Escape hybrid, enough that Bill Ford had to back down from sales forecasts.
I just don't see how Honda could enter that segment with a V6+hybrid and be cost competitive. Plus, a powertrain like that might actually outshine the RDX. A 4 cylinder hybrid would make a lot more sense, but a diesel is more likely than any hybrid at all IMO.
Forbes does Autos now? I read them to see how my mutual funds are doing.
I have no doubt the RL is safe, but I don't think a car in that price class says much about how the CR-V will do in crash tests. The Civic making the IIHS Top Ten actually is a better sign, since parts are shared between the two.
Is GPS NAV a confirmed option for the '07 CR-V? This segment is lacking in that regard, closest thing would be a Mazda5 w/NAV.
I used the NAV pricing from the new Civic. That is the latest model and most similar in terms of interior content.
The name for the RAV4 is, in fact, Recreational Activity Vehicle (with) 4WD. CR-V (Comfortable Runabout Vehicle) may be more correct in terms of model accuracy, but I don't find it any more inspiring.
I don't think the RL tells us much about how the CR-V will fare, either. But they both share the ACE body structure and that design has been doing very well in crash tests for the Civic, RL, and others which have used it. The concept is proven, if not the vehicle itself.
NAV is pretty much a given. Honda has been pushing it across the line figuring higher volume will allow them to drop per unit prices. I suspect it will become the platform for the next generation of in-car infotainment.
Don't know if this was mentioned previously, but the BMW X3 has a similar design where the rear bumper is flush with the tailgate.
I hope the per-unit price of NAV gets lower--and, I'd like to see it offered on non-loaded models. $2000 (the going rate) is a bit steep compared to aftermarket prices, although an OEM model gives you full integration with the factory controls.
Honda has a few slightly different NAV units. The one used in the Civic runs $1,750, while the unit for most Acuras is $2,000. The one in the Accord, Pilot, and Ridgeline also carries a $2K price tag.
I expect the CR-V will get the same unit as the Civic.
You can find a Garmin StreetPilot c320 like mine for $250 on the web, dirt cheap IMO. Even the newer Nuvi models go for less than $600 and add a bunch of features.
Factory GPS prices have to come down. I bet they eventually cost half what they do now.
Are those models voice-activated? If so, how good is the recognition program? Are we talked integrated into the dash, or a unit that gets suction-cupped to the top of the dash with wires trailing about?
I understand there are functional benefits (portability!) to these handheld units, but they are lacking when it comes to the coolness factor and ergonomics. Not exactly properties befitting a luxury vehicle.
I expect what will eventually happen is a computer screen will the be standard hardware along with a set of basic programmable controls. Then owners will be able to plug in their aftermarket devices. Much the same way you can plug an MP3 player into some OEM stereo system.
But those hand held units have a long way to go before that is the norm.
I found these new shots of the 2007 CRV. Not sure if anyone has seen them. It's starting to grow on me. Take a look at the trunk detail and interesting hatch opening. Wonder if the lower portion, underneith the hand grasp lowers?
You'd be surprised, even those basic GPS systems are nicer than you think. For $800 you can get Bluetooth, text-to-voice, MP3, XM Traffic, the works. No voice recognition, though.
OK, maybe not for an Acura, but we're also talking Civic and CR-V, here.
You can get double-DIN models that basically replace your whole stereo from Panasonic, for around $1600 last time I looked, and I didn't shop the prices around. They even offer a backup camera option for just $100 more. Since it's in-dash it is fully integrated.
Most models run on batteries and an go up to 8 hours on a charge. Some even use AAA batteries. So the wires are optional.
What we need to see is a simple "docking station" for these systems. Then they'll catch on. Give them the integrated look. All they need is 12v power.
BTW, the hump on that hatch looks better than in the last pic. The lines match up with the overall design.
"OK, maybe not for an Acura, but we're also talking Civic and CR-V, here."
I was hoping you wouldn't notice that. The whole time I was writing that post, I was thinking I was in the RDX thread. :confuse:
"You can get double-DIN models that basically replace your whole stereo from Panasonic, for around $1600 last time I looked, and I didn't shop the prices around."
Does that include installation? Regardless, the Civic's NAV (which is not as fancy as the units from Acura) goes for $1,700, includes a warranty, and the price is wrapped up into the car loan.
Anyway, Honda is trying to get prices down and is doing it by offering these units across the board. But there is still a definite advantage to the integrated design. If people felt the $200 units were just as good, manufacturers wouldn't be adding factory NAV options to every model.
Just when Toyota discovered (accidently) that buyers want a more aggressive looking small SUV (RAV4), Honda comes out with the 2007 that reverts back to the CUTE look IMO. The bangle headlights and front looks like the car is smiling and the totally awful shape of the last window to create a halfmoon of windows is more than most men will want to buy!!! Sometimes I think these designers need to have a bunch of guys kick the crap out of them so they learn what we want!!! Oh well, I'm guessing since Toyota is doing so well with a more aggressive looking Rav4, that some Honda executives are wishing they could kick the crap out of their cute desingers!!!
Hello there, Does any of you guys or gals seen an interior picture of the 2007 crv specifically the instrument gages,meaning the dash board and if do would you please post it?At the present own a 02'CRV LX 2WD and love it.
>50% of US vehicle sales are either to a woman or the purchase is greatly influenced by a woman.
As for the RAV4, read the posts on Edmunds about how the base model costs $2300 more than a similarly equipped CR-V. I guess if you need a manly vehicle.....be prepared to pay.
"2006 CR-V VS. 2007CR-V the 1st figure is the 2006, the 2nd the 2007! Wheelbase: 103.3-104.3 Length: 181.0-180.7 Height: 66.2-64.7 Front,62.7 Rear. Width: 70.2-73.6 Track Front: 60.4-61.9 Track Rear: 60.8-61.9 Ground Clearance Min.: 8.1-5.12 Head Room Front: 40.9-38.7 Head Room Rear: 39.1-38.3 Leg Room Front: 41.3-41.8 Leg Room Rear: 39.4-37.7 Hip Room Front: 54.5-54.4 Hip Room Rear: 53.5-53.0 Shoulder Room Front: 56.9-58.2 Shoulder Room Rear: 56.5-56.3 Cargo Volume: (Rear Seats Down) 72.0-61.0 CubicFeet Fuel Tank: 15.3-18.0 Gal. Weight 4WD EX: 3472LBS.-3720LBS. The 'Smile' grill is a bit longer in length and not as tall in height on the final production vehicle! DO NOT WORRY WHERE I GET THE INFO, I JUST HOPE IT HELPS. I DO LOVE HONDAS AND I'M SURE IT WILL LOOK NICE ONCE WE SEE THE FINAL RESULTS. KEEP CHECKING IN FOR MORE INFO. "
Here are a couple of in-dash models for $1399-1499, and Crutchfield has higher prices than usual.
They're double-DIN, but of course car makers are countering by offering non-standard stereo openings that prevent the install of these types of systems.
Did they really cut 2.2 inches from front headroom? That's not a small change. I don't know what the gender mix is for buyers of the CR-V, but Honda will have crossed off anyone much above 6 ft if headroom is only 38 inches.
If true, the new CR-V will have less headroom than an Accord.
I wouldn't worry too much about those specs. There are people out there who have driven the new CR-V and are suggesting that several of the specs yyssyy keeps posting are incorrect.
Of course, they won't post the real specs because they value the insider information they get and will not violate the press embargo.
For what it's worth, I had no issue with headroom on the RDX that did the auto show circuit, and I believe that model had a moonroof. I'm about 6' with a long torso and a short inseam (just 30").
Comments
"Just ordered a new 2007 CRV, but what have I ordered? Is it an SUV or is it a car? I think it is not. Not an SUV and not a car and certainly not a "cross-over" vehicle. You tell me what you think it is.
1. It will not only be the safest vehicle in its class but will be the safest vehicle ever. Reasoning: This is the fourth vehicle Honda has created with the ACE body structure. It is the latest and most refined version and because you do sit up much higher than a car in the new
CRV, you can see farther down the road to avoid potential problems. So yes, the Acura RL is the documented king of safety at the moment, but the 2007 CRV is about to take the throne.
2. It may be an economy car. Daily fuel mileage, day in and day out driving will likely bring at least 25 mpg with substantially more on the highway. This is great! I have not owned a V6 or V8 vehicle for some time. With the 2007 CRV there is no need to put yourself in a dangerous tiny on the ground type vehicle to get great gas mileage.
3. It may almost be a sports car. The handling of the 2007 CRV is supposed to be jaw-dropping. With this vehicle, gone are the days of your body fighting gravity on sweeping or tight turns. At least 17 inch tires.
4. It has all of the advantages of an SUV, with none of the disadvantages. Well the disadvantages of SUV ownership are legendary: Dangerous rollover potential, poor fuel mileage, slow, cramped interiors, trucks with campershells made more nice at twice the price,
hard ride, terrible handling, terrible turning radius, terrible to park, wears you out to drive them, need to rent a car to actually be comfortable on any longer trip, etc. And then when they address one of these areas you end up with serious compromises like the Nissan F35 or
F45 which have no stow capacity--gone--no ride quality--gone. And dangerous blocked views or the big GM versions of SUVs which are just tank trucks in disguise for double money. Really nasty stuff.
5. It is now a luxury vehicle. The level of luxury available on the new CRV is going to put previous CRV owners in shock and new owners will wonder what they have missed. Well they certainly haven't missed this level of comfort. It is really going to be something.
6. RAV4 is no longer in the same class. Yes this famous duel is over. The RAV4 has gone with bulbous sheetmetal, cheap cost cutting cloth interior and 3rd rate foam in the seats, and a gas guzzling V-6 with over 250hp! Outrageous. The old well hey we can't compete with them
so we will just compete with ourselves and put motors out of our other vehicles in it. Now the RAV4 is a gas guzzling wallow of a ride except you are sitting on park benches.
If you are considering buying a new 2007 Honda CRV you may well want to consider the following vehicles:
1. Audi S4. You can get the 4WD of the new CRV and the same great handling. Trunk space is not bad. Yes it is a little more cramped, gets terrible fuel mileage, and costs 2 1/2 times more but it is something to consider.
2. Acura RL. Same in the class of its own safety of the ACE body structure, same # 1 in quality from Honda, same rich interior, same great music, same great handling. Sure its double money and you sit three heads lower and the gas mileage can't compare, but it is after all a Honda.
3. Porsche Cayenne S. Same great handling. The new 2007 Honda CRV's equal in looks I must admit. Excellent paint. Lots of options to pay for and make it special that the CRV just includes in it's price. But the downside is of course Porsche's legendary poor build quality and astronomical time in the shop instead of with you behind the wheel problems. Horrid gas mileage. Too big and popped up their so high that it is more of a Hummer type statement to make up for other life's
failings than a vehicle that anyone could actually live with. But still at only 4 times the price of the new 2007 Honda CRV you might want to think about it.
Yes, Honda has created a totally new vehicle unlike any vehicle ever created before. A vehicle that literally has it all. Price is not set but I am expecting it to come in at just over $17,500 with a good dealer discount.[This is just in case the head screwed on backwards jibby jab dealers try to pak these puppies beyond the MSRP. I had to put the shock in them] Don't ever never ever pay a dime over MSRP for your new 2007 Honda CRV. Honda will price them right between $22,000 and $26,000 all loaded, cleaned up, taxed, and delivered. Go elswhere if they try to make you pay a dime over that window sticker. Wait till late next year and they will be discounting them as usual.
The SUV, the car, the crossover, are gone. Honda just created the world's first "Planet Safe Transport" vehicle the world's first PSTV--enjoy the trip. "
so we will just compete with ourselves and put motors out of our other vehicles in it. Now the RAV4 is a gas guzzling wallow of a ride except you are sitting on park benches.
I think the sales later will tell us if this statement is true or not. In my opinion,CRV most likely will not blow RAV4 off just because RAV4 is a Toyota with excellent reputation and reliablity.
BTY,I don't know why Honda fans always hate Toyota, but not really many Toyota fans hate Honda. Maybe I am wrong!! :P
Sports car? huh? Yet, no manual?
No manual ≠ sports car
Really? It didn't even make the top 10...
http://www.iihs.org/news/2005/iihs_news_120405.pdf
Besides, Honda said the same thing about the Element, how all the weight was due to a reinforced side structure, and then the crash tests were "Marginal". So much for that....
They made the author drink the Kool-Aid. Some of the stuff in that text is just plain absurd. Sports car, LOL. I doubt the Acura RDX will be *that* good.
"gas guzzling V-6" in the RAV4? Really? CR managed just 1 mpg less than the 4 cyldinder CR-V with all that extra power. EPA figures are also very reasonable. Far, far from guzzling.
third row seat I'll never use
But that's why it's optional. A friend owns a Highlander, and 1st graders fit in there just fine. They use the 3rd row all the time. Why not give people a choice? The Pilot is too big for some, the Mazda5 has no AWD option.
Sure, 10 year olds might not fit, but that means they are useful for a whole NINE YEARS, i.e. much longer than the average person keeps their vehicle.
-juice
Agree with your 3rd row points as well. Highlander's 3rd row was acutally an afterthought, so while I haven't sat in it, the Rav's is probably somewhat more accomodating.
Ist and 2nd row space is not affected, and in most of these designs, the 2nd row slides to give you a compromise of sorts when you're using the third row. We are only a family of 3, so something like a Pilot or full-size minivan makes no sense for us. However, we have 3 nieces/nephews and occasional out of town guests that neccessitates in us taking 2 cars at the present. An economical to run 6-7 passenger vehicle like the Mazda5 or Rav4 will be our next vehicle. The CR-V could've been a contender.....
"We don't know what it will be yet," he says. "Maybe something between a minivan and a SUV. But we do need something between the CR-V and the Pilot."
To me that's an indirect way of admitting they need to counter the RAV4 some how.
-juice
You've gotta laugh.
-juice
Diesel rumors persist, so hopefully they'll get that over here soon. I think putting it in the CR-V first would be a good idea. The Escape hybrid is too pricey, the Jeep Liberty diesel is being dropped IIRC, so the Saturn Vue Greenline is the only fuel sipper in this class and Honda could clean up with all the import buyers.
-juice
Then there's this blurb in the news today:
"Sales of the new Honda Civic and other fuel-sipping four-cylinder engine cars were benefiting from high gasoline prices, Fukui said, adding that a shift away from big SUVs was also fanning sales of the CR-V crossover despite its reaching the end of its model life." (Washington Post)
Steve, Host
I think it is because more Honda buyers tend to be more into cars, and like the more that Hondas are more "sporty".
So, since they like cars, the Honda owners tend to speak out more and since Toyota is their closest rival, the result is some perceived (or actual) hate of Toyota. Toyota owners are like most people, they are not into cars, so you do not hear from them.
They are both good, depends on what your preferences are.
Back to the 2007 CRV, I will think it will sell just fine. Not as good as the last generation, but all manufacturers have their ups and downs, even Toyota and Honda.
If it doesn't gain too much weight that should be adequate to pull it around for most folks. If a buyer wants sportiness they'll send them to an Acura dealership to look at the RDX.
-juice
Dan
Whenever I hear about them getting stolen off the backs of these SUVs I am SO HAPPY!
Personally I would favor a 4cyl hybrid. A nice comfy lil suv that gets good mileage for my so cal traffic battles.
People here are acting like there's never been a V6-powered small SUV before. Or one with a 3rd row of seats.
Back in 2000, when Ford introduced the 201 hp Escape/Tribute twins, Honda didn't need to produce a v6 to compete. Saturn released a 250hp Vue a few years back and sales of the CR-V have been fine. Subaru introduced an incredibly fast turbo Forester and got a yawn from the sales floor.
Suzuki has had a third row of seats on the market for several years. Toyota did just fine with the Highlander as a two row vehicle and adding a 3rd didn't significantly boost sales.
A big or powerful engine has never been a strong suit for the CR-V. Yet, the CR-V has consistently been at the top of the food chain without the need for incentives to stay there.
http://www.forbesautos.com/advice/toptens/safest/vehicles.html
The MSRP for the 2006 SE is $25,400 plus another $550 for the destination fee (25,950 total).
The 2007 CR-V will likely see a price increase. New models always do. Figure the new top of the line vehicle will go for about $26,850. Adding NAV would put the most expensive model at $28,350.
But, frankly, I think that's being conservative. We keep hearing rumors about new features and how the CR-V will be loaded with technology. I figure prices will range from 21,000 to about 29,000.
I am not familiar with the four-cylinder used in the RAV4 and Camry, but others have indicated that it is not as smooth as Honda's Accord/CRV four-banger. You're right--look at the Accord's history. Honda sold tons of Accords without offering a V6, when the competition did--why would the CRV be different?
While we're talking about the RAV4, I also have a problem with the RAV4's goofy name (as well as the 4Runner). I think it stands for Recreational Active Vehicle with 4-wheel drive. So a 2WD RAV4 should really be called a RAV2, and a 2WD 4Runner should be called a 2Runner.
Another option is that it stands for Recreational Active Vehicle with 4-cylinder engine, in which case there should now be a RAV6, plus a 6Runner and 8Runner.
The only logical alternative is that it stands for Recreational Active Vehicle with 4 wheels--this also makes the 4Runner's name understandable, but I am left wondering why the other models in Toyota's lineup don't feature four wheels. The nameplates featuring four wheels should be called the Camry4, 4Sequoia, Yaris4, 4Tundra, etc...
Saturn threw a monkey wrench in the segment by pricing the Vue Green Line lower than expected. At under $23k, it put a lot of pressure on Ford's Escape hybrid, enough that Bill Ford had to back down from sales forecasts.
I just don't see how Honda could enter that segment with a V6+hybrid and be cost competitive. Plus, a powertrain like that might actually outshine the RDX. A 4 cylinder hybrid would make a lot more sense, but a diesel is more likely than any hybrid at all IMO.
Forbes does Autos now? I read them to see how my mutual funds are doing.
I have no doubt the RL is safe, but I don't think a car in that price class says much about how the CR-V will do in crash tests. The Civic making the IIHS Top Ten actually is a better sign, since parts are shared between the two.
Is GPS NAV a confirmed option for the '07 CR-V? This segment is lacking in that regard, closest thing would be a Mazda5 w/NAV.
-juice
The name for the RAV4 is, in fact, Recreational Activity Vehicle (with) 4WD. CR-V (Comfortable Runabout Vehicle) may be more correct in terms of model accuracy, but I don't find it any more inspiring.
I don't think the RL tells us much about how the CR-V will fare, either. But they both share the ACE body structure and that design has been doing very well in crash tests for the Civic, RL, and others which have used it. The concept is proven, if not the vehicle itself.
NAV is pretty much a given. Honda has been pushing it across the line figuring higher volume will allow them to drop per unit prices. I suspect it will become the platform for the next generation of in-car infotainment.
I hope the per-unit price of NAV gets lower--and, I'd like to see it offered on non-loaded models. $2000 (the going rate) is a bit steep compared to aftermarket prices, although an OEM model gives you full integration with the factory controls.
I expect the CR-V will get the same unit as the Civic.
Factory GPS prices have to come down. I bet they eventually cost half what they do now.
-juice
I understand there are functional benefits (portability!) to these handheld units, but they are lacking when it comes to the coolness factor and ergonomics. Not exactly properties befitting a luxury vehicle.
I expect what will eventually happen is a computer screen will the be standard hardware along with a set of basic programmable controls. Then owners will be able to plug in their aftermarket devices. Much the same way you can plug an MP3 player into some OEM stereo system.
But those hand held units have a long way to go before that is the norm.
http://automobiles.honda.com/cr-v/index.aspx
I signed up a couple of months ago - and nothing has been sent - except acknowledgement of signing up.
I have seen a lot of information about the 2007 CR-V on the web, why wouldn't Honda give us something
It's starting to grow on me. Take a look at the trunk detail and interesting hatch opening.
Wonder if the lower portion, underneith the hand grasp lowers?
http://www.thecarconnection.com/Enthusiasts/Spy_Shots/Spy_Shots_2007_Honda_CR-V.- S178.A10595.html">
Link doesn't work for me.
http://tinyurl.com/n9ez5
The part below the hatch handle does not drop down. It is simply a separate plastic panel. The RDX has a similar panel.
OK, maybe not for an Acura, but we're also talking Civic and CR-V, here.
You can get double-DIN models that basically replace your whole stereo from Panasonic, for around $1600 last time I looked, and I didn't shop the prices around. They even offer a backup camera option for just $100 more. Since it's in-dash it is fully integrated.
Most models run on batteries and an go up to 8 hours on a charge. Some even use AAA batteries. So the wires are optional.
What we need to see is a simple "docking station" for these systems. Then they'll catch on. Give them the integrated look. All they need is 12v power.
BTW, the hump on that hatch looks better than in the last pic. The lines match up with the overall design.
-juice
I was hoping you wouldn't notice that. The whole time I was writing that post, I was thinking I was in the RDX thread. :confuse:
"You can get double-DIN models that basically replace your whole stereo from Panasonic, for around $1600 last time I looked, and I didn't shop the prices around."
Does that include installation? Regardless, the Civic's NAV (which is not as fancy as the units from Acura) goes for $1,700, includes a warranty, and the price is wrapped up into the car loan.
Anyway, Honda is trying to get prices down and is doing it by offering these units across the board. But there is still a definite advantage to the integrated design. If people felt the $200 units were just as good, manufacturers wouldn't be adding factory NAV options to every model.
I don't really expect anything until they make the announcement for it, be that at a show or press conference.
Does any of you guys or gals seen an interior picture of the 2007 crv specifically the instrument gages,meaning the dash board and if do would you please post it?At the present own a 02'CRV LX 2WD and love it.
As for the RAV4, read the posts on Edmunds about how the base model costs $2300 more than a similarly equipped CR-V. I guess if you need a manly vehicle.....be prepared to pay.
DO NOT WORRY WHERE I GET THE INFO, I JUST HOPE IT HELPS. I DO LOVE HONDAS AND I'M SURE IT WILL LOOK NICE ONCE WE SEE THE FINAL RESULTS. KEEP CHECKING IN FOR MORE INFO. "
Surprisingly, the Odyssey has more male buyers as a % of the total. Call it a Man Van I guess.
-juice
They're double-DIN, but of course car makers are countering by offering non-standard stereo openings that prevent the install of these types of systems.
Install is probably a couple of hours.
-juice
If true, the new CR-V will have less headroom than an Accord.
Of course, they won't post the real specs because they value the insider information they get and will not violate the press embargo.
Bottom line... we're going to have to wait.
-juice