I disagree with your disagree. While the aerodynamic look may be very stylish, it still has some function and the Civic has the MPGs to prove it - same as the FIT.
The rear window is BS, merely for looks. With no functionality. Actually negative functionality. Come to think of it negative looks too.
I think what happened was they saw the success of the Civic and thought the CRV had to be bold and innovative too. But they blew it.
I never said it wasn't a good marketing strategy or that I wouldn't buy it I didn't have a 2006. I just said I thought it was unhonda like to design that window the way they did. I also said it was my personal way of looking at things that aren't functional - in my eyes they LOOK ugly.
IF honda maintains their reliability and mpg leadership their vehicles will sell like crazy, like they have for a long time.
"Compared to what? The RAV? LOL. If you like square and functional go get an Element."
"Conventional" compared to all of the SUVs that are modeled after the Lexus RX300...
I would have bought an Element back in 2003, but the maximum weight capacity of 680 lbs was way too light. It is around 250 lbs less than the CR-V. Strange in a vehicle that is supposed to be good for utility, especially since it is of a similar size as the CR-V.
"Come on,man. The CRV is the best selling SUV in the country."
Ah, but what an amazing vehicle it might have been with innovation instead of copying... lost opportunities for another 5 years. A bigger worry is that they will continue to be a design "follower" rather than "leader" when they come to redesign the next generation.
It's a leader in it's segment at the price! Rav 4 still has "old tech" useless,poser,mileage robbing, roof rack, and cattle gate of a door w/ a 40 pound tire stuck on it.
I am thinking of replacing the Bridgestone OEM tires. I've generally had good luck with Michelins, and cost-per-mile is generally about the same as the tires that cost less upfront.
Which Michelin is right for Pittsburgh, up and down hills, NEVER offroad, sometimes WINTERY driving?
Following has been a Japanese forte'. The first Lexus LS400 took all the good points of the Mercedes design but added the quality and hassle-free owner experience that Mercedes lacked (still does!)!
The CRV might, indeed, look like an RX or BMW, but SO THE HECK WHAT?
It's why I don't buy that the Civic emphasizes style over function to the degree that the new CRV does. Aerodynamic designs will ALWAYS be attractive to a certain type. Aerodynamics IS FUNCTION, FORM derived from function.
My 07 CR-V has a tire size of 225/65/17. Coincidentally, this is the same size as the tires on my '04 Highlander, so I have already gone through a couple of sets of these tires. I had OEM Michelins, and would have been happy to replace them with higher grade Michelins, but there were no other Michelins in that size. There was not a huge variety of the other brands either.
I ended up installing GOODYEAR FORTERA TRIPLETREADS as per recommendation of THE TIRE RACK. The other tire recommended was the Michelin Cross Terrain. Both of these premium tires come in the size you mentioened (which is the CR-V size). I usually am a Michelin man, but the Fortera was actually rated better so I thought I'd give it a shot. I'll report back in time on how they are doing.
True, aerodynamics serve a function, but things like the small rear quarter window do not. You might even say they serve a DISfunction, i.e. blocking your view.
Again, though, doesn't seem like buyers care much.
This is what Honda has to say about the aerodynamics.
The CR-V manages airflow for an approximate 10 percent improvement in coefficient of drag (Cd). Items such as the A pillar, side mirrors, wiper layout, underfloor pans and strakes have all been designed to minimize air turbulence. These designs result in enhanced fuel economy and less wind noise. Other measures contributing to reduced wind noise levels include reducing the width of body seams, mounting glass flush with the surrounding body panels, and using double seals around all doors.
I guess I felt the same way and that's why I put the Fortera's on at 6500 miles. The Bridgestones had more life left (although not too much), but they just felt junky. Maybe it's psychological. Maybe not.
"I guess I felt the same way and that's why I put the Fortera's on at 6500 miles. The Bridgestones had more life left (although not too much), but they just felt junky. Maybe it's psychological. Maybe not. "
6500 miles? Do you mean 65,000 miles? Or else you are owed some $$ from the tire warranty???
They were a great the day i put them on I purchased my 06SE and three days 300 miles later I had them on. As we all know the CRV has road noise but the stock tires made it even worse. Great over all tires still road noise on coarse roads but no tire will stop that on the CRV. Top rated by CR Reports.
I notice on mine and a lot other CRV's create brake dust quickly indicative of short life for brake pads.I have a Highlander with 50k miles also and never saw much dust on it. Did Honda cut cost with cheap brakes? Heaven knows they did not cut the MSRP.My Toyota has gone all this miles with no brake work needed. I had a 2001 ACURA TL and it's brakes did not last long either.
Nope. I mean 6500 miles on an '07 CR-V purchased in Oct of 2006. I probably COULD try to collect on the tire warranty, but my experience has been that the best you can do is get a pro-rata price on the same crappy tires (or maybe better tires of the same crappy brand). I ate it and now have Fortera TripleTreads with a 60,000 mile guarantee.
"Nope. I mean 6500 miles on an '07 CR-V purchased in Oct of 2006. I probably COULD try to collect on the tire warranty, but my experience has been that the best you can do is get a pro-rata price on the same crappy tires (or maybe better tires of the same crappy brand). I ate it and now have Fortera TripleTreads with a 60,000 mile guarantee."
Wow, that's terrible. My 2003 EX Duelers lasted 41K miles. Not the best tire, but not too bad. I put Michelin Hydroedge on it, and they worked out well.
I’m looking at the CR-V as a replacement for aging 1993 Explorer. For the owners of 2007 CR-V’s, is this a good car for long road trips in terms of ride, road noise, etc.? Thanks, John
Road noise might be the only question mark. The 2007 model is significantly quieter than earlier models. Still, it's an SUV, which are inherently difficult to get as quiet as most passenger cars.
Some people have replaced the OEM Bridgestone tires with quieter ones (they say). I find the tires a little noisy only on rough roads. Otherwise, they're fine.
I've driven long trips in both a 2007 Camry and the new CR-V. The noise level is comparable, imo, excepting for rough roads.
The CR-V is clearly not a serious SUV. Think tall station wagon. As that, I'm very satisfied. Mileage on trips, 28-30. Honda designs and builds a quality product. I could nitpick it a little, but mostly we're talking personal choice items. Good luck.
It is a no brainer,get the CRV.I had 96 Outback and traded for a 98 Explorer for the increased power but it averaged 15-20 mpg.Then the poor quality of materials was an issue. The CRV is no power house but it gets decent mpg.So if you don't plan on passing Semis on the freeway it's okay.Since my wife got the CRV I drive the Highlander and it has a better ride,more power,and still gets 20-24 mpg.I average 22mpg with 2/3 freeway driving.The one overlooked thing about the CRV is at 90k miles you don't have to replace the timing belt like most cars.It has a chain so that is $1000 in your pocket.
Our 03 is definitely more peppy than the older Explorers! And much more supportive seats. The 07s should be even better! My mom has a 95 Explorer. Feels like driving a hunk of lead with poor handling.
Thanks everyone for the information and comparison to the Explorer. My purchase is a few months off, but we are pretty much set on a Honda. BTW, this will be my first non Ford or GM product in my 43 years of driving.
I've had same problem on my 2007 CRV 2WD. Taken it in three times so far in only 6000 miles. They've realigned it twice and after the second time said they also needed to replace the front right tire (internal ply separation) which was back-ordered. Funny thing was that it drove pretty well between the time of the second alignment and when the replacement tire was put on and they aligned it a third time (said it was SOP when mounting a new tire) Now it pulls to the right as badly as it ever did. Noticed yesterday the steering wheel is'nt centered when I drive straight down the road. Back for a fourth visit soon.
I, too, have an '07 2WD that pulls to the right. The dealer just had it up on the alignment rack, and told me that it was within Honda's spec. I wanted to argue with them, that there was no way it was within spec if it pulled that hard. The service technician took it for a drive, but "found" nothing. Dealer made me feel guilty for making him put it on the rack for an "expensive" test that a test drive would have proved out. I'm going to press them harder - I see lots of talk here about the crumby Bridgestones that come from the factory. Maybe those are the culprits.
I too had my 2007 in because it not only drifted to the right, it pulled to the right. It was aligned. Still not right. Will be back at the next oil change.
**RADIALS ARE NOTROIUS FOR CAUSING PULLING ISSUES**
Type in "radial tire pull" in google or yahoo for many results.
I've had several cars over the years that pulled left or right - that was caused by radials. There's one sure way to verify this. Swap the front tires.
"If" the pulling is caused by the radials, the pull will switch to the left or go away, or change in some noticeable way. If nothing changes, the problem is something else. The radials on my 95 Civic will NEVER be rotated. If they are, it pulls to the left. I discovered this long after it was too late to have them exchanged. As long as I leave those radials exactly where they are, the car tracks perfectly straight on the highway.
Fortunately, my new CR-V tracks very straight on the highway.
Does anyone know where I can find some aftermarket LED taillights for my 2007 Honda C-RV? The addition of LEDs would definitely enhance its appearance.
I recently purchased earlier this Jan/Feb of 2007 a brand-new 2007 Honda CR-V EXL, $28K. I am writing to you regarding a manufacturer's defect by Honda in the manufacture of its new line of Honda CR-Vs.
My car presently has 3,158 miles on it. I brought it into San Francisco Honda Monday, 13Aug, due I had noticed some irregularities which I wanted to get checked out. They were as follows:
1) A tapping sound in the back of my car; 2) A wet spot noted on the floor of my garage under the hood area; 3) Intermittent inability to start the car whereby battery light would come on; and 4) Inability to accelerate, but sudden surge thereafter when driving.
Later that day I received a call from SF Honda, the service dealer, to advise that:
1) The tapping sound in the back of my car is due to a welding defect. They have removed all the back panels but not been able to discern the exact location thus giving rise to the concern that there may be more than one area that is experiencing this defect; and
2) The wet spot noted is actually due to a transmission leak and they will need to replace the entire transmission
Upon hearing this, I was flabbergasted. Who would have thought that a brand-new car, a Honda which is noted for its reliability, would encounter such problems? And at 3,000 miles? And simultaneously?
I was told to contact Honda America, which I did. A complaint was lodged on 13Aug at 4:40PM and I was promised a call back within 48 hours.
I did not hear back from them despite leaving repeated messages. When I finally got thru to my case manager, he advised as follows:
AA) The 48 hour time limit starts from when HE receives the complaint, not when its lodged (so the time frames pretty much pointless then);
BB) The case had been closed (without action, remedy or follow-up); and
CC) He would start, but only after he had had his lunch!
I cannot believe that I, the consumer should have to be going through this! My car is a lemon--if after but 3,000 miles it already starts to exhibit such problems, who is to say what it will do at 6,000?
I believe that they should buyback the car and give me a replacement. If you have any ideas, would appreciate your suggestions.
Sorry to hear about your peoblems, but this is where the lemon law comes in. Check your state's lemon laws, and I believe CA has the best consumer protection laws on the books. See if the vehicle qualifies to be processed under the lemon law.
I think NY Lemon Law says that the vehicle has to spend a cumulative 30 days in the shop in the first year, or if it takes more than 3 times to fix the same problem in the first 12,000 miles or 12 months of delivery.
You can start the process yourself, or get a lemon law lawyer. The defendand, Honda in this case, will have to pay the legal fees if it is found guilty.
I would wait to see whether SF Honda is able to resolve all the issues before seeking legal assistance. In order for the lemon law to be applied, your vehicle must spend a certain amount of time inside the dealer's repair facilities (the amount of time varies from state to state). The transmission issue should be relatively easy for them to fix....what worries me is the first issue...it appears that the mechanics does really know what to do and that is completely normal considering that the CR-V is a brand new first year model. Where did you purchase your CR-V? Which dealer?
Just picked up a new second 07 CRV since we loved the 1st one we bought so much. But in driving it home from the dealer, I noticed a sort of drag feeling (yes, the parking brake was off) while driving and mpg of 10-11 on the meter. Compared the 2d CRV with our 1st 07 CRV later on our street which has a long hill. From a speed of 19 mph at a specific point while coasting down the hill (no gas at all applied), the previously boughtt CRV reached 34 mph while the new CRV reached only 21 mph. Similarly, in the same test, the previously bought CRV mpg meter was pinned to the right while the new CRV reached only 40 mpg. Anybody have any suggestions as to what might be going on here?
Compare the two. Make sure transmission not in D3. If the RPM is different then maybe the transmission is in a different gear. Perhaps the grade logic function is not working properly
Pursue the lemow law because Honda is known for settling these claims out of court. They basically take care of the consumer before you ever get to trial.
I once saw statistics for one state's lemons and there wasn't a single Honda on there. Other manufacturers had dozens. They buy 'em back to get them off the streets.
Hard to say. Depends on how they mixed em up this time - and whether the next rotation puts them back into the "problem" position again. With more tread worn off, then *maybe* the original two front tires (in same position) won't give you a problem again.
You really won't know until they are rotated again.
You'd be surprised how many people NEVER rotate their tires and accept a slightly lower mileage life - to avoid these kinds of issues.
Comments
The rear window is BS, merely for looks. With no functionality. Actually negative functionality. Come to think of it negative looks too.
I think what happened was they saw the success of the Civic and thought the CRV had to be bold and innovative too. But they blew it.
Harv
IF honda maintains their reliability and mpg leadership their vehicles will sell like crazy, like they have for a long time.
"Conventional" compared to all of the SUVs that are modeled after the Lexus RX300...
I would have bought an Element back in 2003, but the maximum weight capacity of 680 lbs was way too light. It is around 250 lbs less than the CR-V. Strange in a vehicle that is supposed to be good for utility, especially since it is of a similar size as the CR-V.
Ah, but what an amazing vehicle it might have been with innovation instead of copying... lost opportunities for another 5 years. A bigger worry is that they will continue to be a design "follower" rather than "leader" when they come to redesign the next generation.
There are some similarities to the Lexus RX series which is a beautiful vehicle, but enough difference to be uniquely Honda.
I don't think Honda or the buying public sees any "lost opportunity" with the 07 CRV.
Being first in SUV sales (of any size), is "amazing".
I doubt they care much if they are the sales leader.
They are also the gotta-hire-more-accountants-to-count-all-the-profits leader.
Seriously, they are laughing all the way to the bank.
But then I am a "function over form" sort of person...
Which Michelin is right for Pittsburgh, up and down hills, NEVER offroad, sometimes WINTERY driving?
The CRV might, indeed, look like an RX or BMW, but SO THE HECK WHAT?
It's why I don't buy that the Civic emphasizes style over function to the degree that the new CRV does. Aerodynamic designs will ALWAYS be attractive to a certain type. Aerodynamics IS FUNCTION, FORM derived from function.
Again, though, doesn't seem like buyers care much.
The CR-V manages airflow for an approximate 10 percent improvement in coefficient of drag (Cd). Items such as the A pillar, side mirrors, wiper layout, underfloor pans and strakes have all been designed to minimize air turbulence. These designs result in enhanced fuel economy and less wind noise. Other measures contributing to reduced wind noise levels include reducing the width of body seams, mounting glass flush with the surrounding body panels, and using double seals around all doors.
http://www.hondanews.com/categories/844/releases/3648
No mention of the shape of windows or other styling elements mentioned here.
Never thought I would actually look forward to tires wearing out, but these Bridgestones are an exception.
Kip
6500 miles? Do you mean 65,000 miles? Or else you are owed some $$ from the tire warranty???
Good Luck
brake dust quickly indicative of short life
for brake pads.I have a Highlander with 50k
miles also and never saw much dust on it.
Did Honda cut cost with cheap brakes? Heaven
knows they did not cut the MSRP.My Toyota has
gone all this miles with no brake work needed.
I had a 2001 ACURA TL and it's brakes did not
last long either.
Wow, that's terrible. My 2003 EX Duelers lasted 41K miles. Not the best tire, but not too bad. I put Michelin Hydroedge on it, and they worked out well.
For the owners of 2007 CR-V’s, is this a good car for long road trips in terms of ride, road noise, etc.?
Thanks, John
Some people have replaced the OEM Bridgestone tires with quieter ones (they say). I find the tires a little noisy only on rough roads. Otherwise, they're fine.
I've driven long trips in both a 2007 Camry and the new CR-V. The noise level is comparable, imo, excepting for rough roads.
The CR-V is clearly not a serious SUV. Think tall station wagon. As that, I'm very satisfied. Mileage on trips, 28-30. Honda designs and builds a quality product. I could nitpick it a little, but mostly we're talking personal choice items. Good luck.
The CRV is no power house but it gets decent mpg.So if you don't plan on passing Semis on the freeway it's okay.Since my wife got the CRV I drive the Highlander and it has a
better ride,more power,and still gets 20-24 mpg.I average
22mpg with 2/3 freeway driving.The one overlooked thing
about the CRV is at 90k miles you don't have to replace
the timing belt like most cars.It has a chain so that is
$1000 in your pocket.
It's based on a car, so it will handle, ride, and drive much better than your truck-based Explorer.
My mom has a 95 Explorer. Feels like driving a hunk of lead with poor handling.
Kip
Thanks, John
**RADIALS ARE NOTROIUS FOR CAUSING PULLING ISSUES**
Type in "radial tire pull" in google or yahoo for many results.
I've had several cars over the years that pulled left or right - that was caused by radials.
There's one sure way to verify this. Swap the front tires.
"If" the pulling is caused by the radials, the pull will switch to the left or go away, or change in some noticeable way. If nothing changes, the problem is something else.
The radials on my 95 Civic will NEVER be rotated. If they are, it pulls to the left. I discovered this long after it was too late to have them exchanged. As long as I leave those radials exactly where they are, the car tracks perfectly straight on the highway.
Fortunately, my new CR-V tracks very straight on the highway.
My car presently has 3,158 miles on it. I brought it into San Francisco Honda Monday, 13Aug, due I had noticed some irregularities which I wanted to get checked out. They were as follows:
1) A tapping sound in the back of my car;
2) A wet spot noted on the floor of my garage under the hood area;
3) Intermittent inability to start the car whereby battery light would come on; and
4) Inability to accelerate, but sudden surge thereafter when driving.
Later that day I received a call from SF Honda, the service dealer, to advise that:
1) The tapping sound in the back of my car is due to a welding defect. They have removed all the back panels but not been able to discern the exact location thus giving rise to the concern that there may be more than one area that is experiencing this defect; and
2) The wet spot noted is actually due to a transmission leak and they will need to replace the entire transmission
Upon hearing this, I was flabbergasted. Who would have thought that a brand-new car, a Honda which is noted for its reliability, would encounter such problems? And at 3,000 miles? And simultaneously?
I was told to contact Honda America, which I did. A complaint was lodged on 13Aug at 4:40PM and I was promised a call back within 48 hours.
I did not hear back from them despite leaving repeated messages. When I finally got thru to my case manager, he advised as follows:
AA) The 48 hour time limit starts from when HE receives the complaint, not when its lodged (so the time frames pretty much pointless then);
BB) The case had been closed (without action, remedy or follow-up); and
CC) He would start, but only after he had had his lunch!
I cannot believe that I, the consumer should have to be going through this! My car is a lemon--if after but 3,000 miles it already starts to exhibit such problems, who is to say what it will do at 6,000?
I believe that they should buyback the car and give me a replacement. If you have any ideas, would appreciate your suggestions.
I think NY Lemon Law says that the vehicle has to spend a cumulative 30 days in the shop in the first year, or if it takes more than 3 times to fix the same problem in the first 12,000 miles or 12 months of delivery.
You can start the process yourself, or get a lemon law lawyer. The defendand, Honda in this case, will have to pay the legal fees if it is found guilty.
Good luck.
Where did you purchase your CR-V? Which dealer?
You probably have a stuck caliper or something from the transport.
I once saw statistics for one state's lemons and there wasn't a single Honda on there. Other manufacturers had dozens. They buy 'em back to get them off the streets.
You just got a Friday 5pm build.
Will the problem return when I bring my CR-V in for a normal tire rotation?
Hard to say. Depends on how they mixed em up this time - and whether the next rotation puts them back into the "problem" position again. With more tread worn off, then *maybe* the original two front tires (in same position) won't give you a problem again.
You really won't know until they are rotated again.
You'd be surprised how many people NEVER rotate their tires and accept a slightly lower mileage life - to avoid these kinds of issues.