2001 - 2006 Honda CR-Vs

handsome44

Well, I've read the replies to my little article on Honda's Marketing practices...I'm very surprised that so many think the act of charging MSRP or more is on the Dealer only... Don't get me wrong that I think the Dealers are Innocent. But can you really tell me that Honda itself doesn't do the market research a year or two ahead of time,, that they didn't know what the public demand would be, and definitely would't control production to promote such a high market price. These are super intelligent very conservative people who carefully plan not only how the car is built, but how it is offered to the public, and have excellent research to predict how it will be received. Can you seriously believe that Honda made a decision to just start out small with building CRV's and then work from there regarding increasing production capacity? These people have ultra millions of dollars at risk, and believe me, they know with almost certainty how the product will be received and how many to make. So,, with this idea,,, I find it impossible to not point a finger at big brother honda as the ultra controling factor in regulating production and retail pricing.
As for the fella who believes in paying MSRP for Odyssey's and CRV's,,, I'm sorry but you make me laugh.... You would't happen to be one of those car salesman who peruse this site to promote the public to pay maximum retail price due to the old value argument?

corey76

http://carpoint.msn.com/Vip/Gallery/Honda/CR-V/5.asp

Look at that interior pic, is that an S2000?

I'm just wondering sure doesn't look like a CRV.

diploid

It's clearly a CR-V with a blue interior.

robertsmx

I think they emphasized that because Honda isn't world renowned for torquey engines (a la Infiniti QX4).
Honda usually goes for a flatter torque curve (a la MDX) instead of a high peak. Both MDX and QX4 make 240 HP, but the Honda does it 750 rpm earlier (5250 rpm versus 6000 rpm) because of a flatter torque curve.

But, Whatever they emphasized makes no sense, as juice pointed out. I mean, what if we used kg-m as the unit to measure torque, and kW to measure power like some other countries?

diploid

Although the MDX and QX4 have the same displacement V-6's with the same hp ratings, the Infiniti manages to generate more torque from the engine (265 vs. 245).

"I mean, what if we used kg-m as the unit to measure torque, and kW to measure power like some other countries?"

Well for one thing, it would be a heck of a lot easier for us car people. It still wouldn't make sense to us, but as a marketing tool, it sells the product. Size *does* matter, and bigger is perceived to be better in the market place.

The one example that I can think of is that condoms with "extra large" printed on the box tend to sell much better than the "regular" ones.

Likewise, car with a high hp rating that comes at a high rpm would look superior against a car with a lower hp rating that came at a much lower rpm.

corey76

Gosh you guys don't have alot of room in that mid size SUV when you opt for the blue interior.:)

tomsr

I rented a new Escape and went on a 100 mile mountain road drive then took a new CRV on a short test.What a difference.The CRV is a quality piece of work but the price is high.I guess you get what you pay for.The Escape had good power but
the ride was bouncy and had lousy seats.At
freeway speeds it did not feel secure.My normal
drive is an Acura CL coupe which is very stable
at 80 mph.I found out that EX is very hard to come by but the LX is plentiful.Is ABS which only the EX has a big deal in dry weather?

varmit

Handsome44 - You may be surprized by this, but even bean counters cannot predict the future. Take, for example, the bean counters at American Honda who turned down the CR-V when it was introduced in 1995. This is why the CR-V was introduced here in the US one year later than many other markets. Even when the CR-V was brought over to the US, they had to stop making Integras because the Sayama plant was needed to crank out more CR-Vs than they ever expected.

In the case of the '02, Honda had to build a new production line at the Swindon plant in England. It takes time to get these lines up and running. We should start seeing new CR-V's from that plant in late Spring or early Summer.

mikefm58

Nope, not a car salesman, sorry to have burst your bubble.

I bought the Odyssey in Nov. 99 when they first came out for MSRP and drove it off the lot that day. Shortly after that they were going for 2-3K over MSRP with a long wait. Not bad huh?

Oh, and I never said I paid MSRP for my CRV, get your facts straight and go read my post again.

Everyone's entitled to an opinion....but your logic in regards to Honda Marketing practices is seriously flawed.

hcmmike

ok, time for another dumb question...I have a 2002 automatic CR-V...I haven't had an auto for years - my wife insisted I stop buying sticks so she could drive the car:)...last night I was stopped at a light on a hill...with the car in drive, it began to roll back down the hill...it wasn't a very steep incline...I thought automatics were supposed to hold their ground while in gear...I'm used to a clutch where I have to keep my foot on the brake so as not to roll back in neutral...is this unusual for an automatic?

carguy62

Not sure if it was a typo but the guys name is Dan Jedlicka. He writes for the Chicago Sun-Times and apparently other places as well.

As for MSRP, I mentioned it a while back, hopefully the Pilot (also the new Accord and eventually the Model X) will take some of the attention away from the CR-V. They can't all go for MSRP, or can they?

bpraxis

Hello and in regards to Hondas big brother controlling the price scenario. As you know companies go out of business all the time as a result of misjudging the marketplace. It is the process of creative destruction that allows Capitalism to be the most dynamic system producing all the wonderful products that we have. Believe it or not Honda actually wants you to be happy and be a repeat customer for life. And no I am not a car salesman. Be patient and the price will come down.

jimmyj1945

I'm tired of waiting. I have owned a lot of Hondas, but I'm done. That's one customer down-more to come. Keep your MSRP vehicles-there are plenty more excellent vehicles today!!!!

bajie2

After driving the new CR-V for a week i switched back to my 2000 Accord. What a difference!
I feel the Accord steering is so effort-consuming.
Is this just my illusion or it's true that SUVs
do have easier handling?

stever

Handsome 44, bpraxis, et. al. - this link posted by dindak elsewhere today may be of interest.

Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards

hayduke01

I can undertand choosing not to pay MSRP or higher for a CR-V. And I can understand Honda not dramatically increasing production as some would like, and also dealers insisting on MSRP when they can get.

Less undertandable is those who respond with anger and hostility to those business decisions. I have neither the right nor the power to compel any dealer to sell on specific terms, i.e., $xxx above invoice, or $xxxx below MSRP. Nor do those dealers have the power to compel me to purchase on their terms.

If I insist on my terms from a specific dealer I'll either get my terms, an acceptable compromise, or disappointment. But if I'm willing to travel a little, as I would be, then I'll find a CR-V for not much over invoice.

Just seems easier than holding a grudge because the local dealer won't meet my terms, or because Honda makes it possible for the local dealer to choose not to meet my terms.

corey76

That just reaffirms my beliefs! Interesting, GM holds 5 out of the 10 top spots! I always figured that, now if they could just get their Chevy and Pontiac divisions up to par!

guyf

Another option. If you do not like Honda's pricing; you can always look somewhere else. When they see their market share go down and the cars stay on the lot; they will start dealing.

Yes the CR-V is nice but it is not perfect. No vehicle is. Road test other brands; you may find something to your liking and cheaper.

ateixeira

Exactly, it's all about supply and demand. If you balk at full MSRP pricing, that's one less sale, and if there are enough people like you, the price goes down.

The has not happened with the Odyssey, but that's a rare exception. Even trendy cars like the Miata, New Beetle, and PT Cruiser were eventually sold with huge discounts.

So why is the Odyssey different? IMHO, it's the only large minivan with the magic folding seat, so demand is high. Supply has been low - they only got the 2nd plant up to speed recently, and the 1st plant will make MDXs and Pilots, so it may not get much better any time soon.

High demand + low supply = high prices.

Another point - what if you walk and buy an alternative? Well, resale on the Odyssey has been fantastic. 2000 models are still selling for right around full price. 100% resale is pretty good in my book. The Sienna is probably 2nd best, but it's not even close. So the lack of alternative (full-size with folding seats) has kept demand high, and resale is high.

One guy in the Odyssey threads is advising people to buy GM, because he got his 2 year old van for $10,500. But that means the new car buyer took a bath, losing perhaps $20 grand in depreciation! You call that an alternative?

This will not happen with the CR-V. Demand will increase a bit, but so will supply. Competitors are abundant and match or exceed the CR-V in some areas. In other words, there are more solid alternatives compared to the Odyssey.

So, my guess is CR-V prices will gradually come down to invoice, if you can afford to be patient. Odyssey prices may not.

-juice

altoon

It makes no sense to for Honda to keep production levels low on the CRV. The mini SUV market is very competitive. OPEC can reduce oil production and drive up prices because they practically have a monopoly. If Honda tries that, their customers are apt to tell them to shove it and go to a competitor (several posts above prove this point). Some very loyal CRV customers are willing to endure the waits and high prices, but I think these are in the minority. Keeping production artificially low is not conducive to the bottom line.

So why are CRV's in short supply? Probably due to pent up demand (a temporary condition caused by a lot of people waiting for the vehicle to come out) and the ordinary problems that come from starting up production on a new product. Demand will level off and production will pick up as they ride down the learning curve. If you want a better deal give it a few months.

ateixeira

Ramp-up for production of the new model takes time (though Honda minimizes this as much as possible), so you lose some production. Then of course the model is new and demand is high at first.

With the 2nd plant kicking in, supply will increase. Demand will remain high at least for the first model year, but with better supply prices will drop. It's already started happening, in some regions, according to what people on this thread have reported paying.

-juice

Spyponder

These conspiracy theories about Honda controlling supply in order to drive up prices are ridiculous. Honda is in the business to sell cars, right? And they sell them to dealers, not consumers. And the price at which they sell each car to the dealer does not vary.

Honda's whole reason for being is to sell as many cars as possible. So why would they limit supply to the dealers? The answer is: they wouldn't. It wouldn't make sense.

I also don;t understand this fixation on MSRP. MSRP is a made-up number. If they raised MSRP on the CR-V by $1,000, and then sold them at $1,000 under MSRP, would that make you happy? The bottom line is if you think the car is worth what dealers are asking for it, then buy one. If you don't, then don't!

Spyponder

I thought you might have some German in you - they way you say "ya" all the time in your posts is a dead giveaway

robertsmx

bajie2
Lighter steering does not mean better handling. I wish my Civic had similar weight to the steering as the Accord. But, some people do prefer lighter steering (in many ways, it is American versus European thing). Sometimes, performance enthusiasts go as far as removing power steering from their cars in an effort to improve steering feedback.

jimmyj1945
I am tired of waiting. I have owned a lot of Hondas, but I'm done. That's one customer down-more to come. Keep your MSRP vehicles-there are plenty more excellent vehicles today!!!!
If I were you, I would not curse Honda for sending vehicles tagged with MSRP to dealerships. Every automaker does that. Now, when you go to dealerships, you don't deal with Honda, but with a dealership, that also (as in my case) sells Buick, Saturn, Suzuki, GMC and Pontiac at the same location. Simple rule of economics comes into play. Dealerships are out there to do business, not social service. They would love to make you pay more for anything. As somebody pointed out earlier, if you had a house to sell, would you prefer to sell it at no profit?

However, unlike GM, Ford and Chrysler, Honda does limit production to manageable volume. It is part of JIT (Just In Time) approach to doing business. It is about as important to move the inventory out as it is to get in. Too much production can backfire. One of Honda/Toyota strength is inventory turnaround time. It is better to not over estimate the market and then struggle to move them out, not today or tomorrow, but say, three-four years from now. As pointed out in certain reports, minivan market has shrunk considerably last year, although Odyssey remains in very high demand. Honda is going to launch Pilot, and further increase Odyssey production. Pilot may absorb some of Odyssey and MDX demand, and then the beauty of platform sharing comes into play. Depending on which of the three vehicles is in greater demand a few months/years from now, the production line may be shifted in that direction.

A good business practice is to be able to supply something that is in demand without running the risk of oversupply. They even did this with Accord back in late 1997 when the current generation was launched. I was one of the lucky ones who paid 8% under MSRP, and wasn't on the waitlist back then, even on this high volume car from Honda. The demand forced Honda to setup a production line in Japan for all American Accord, and export 60K of them per year. One of the reasons I can think of would be that Honda had sold only 350K Accords the previous year, and that they were planning to bring down the MSRP on TL in a big way, which they did.

If there are plenty more vehicles out there today, there is no reason for you to be upset. Just take your money where the worth is. That is just what I would do. Good luck.

robertsmx

diploid
There are couple of examples that bring out the difference in Honda's way of designing engines. One of them is comparing BMW's 3.2 liter I-6 (previous generation M3) to Acura's 3.2 liter V6 (CL/TL Type-S). Here are the specs,

Acura (Engine- 3.2/V6 SOHC, Compression- 10.5:1, redline- 6900 rpm)
260 HP @ 6100 rpm, 232 lb.-ft @ 3500 rpm to 5500 rpm

BMW (Engine- 3.2/I6, DOHC, Compression- 10.5:1, redline- 6800 rpm)
240 HP @ 6000 rpm, 236 lb.-ft @ 3750 rpm

Quite similar engines as far as power delivery and redline goes (developing maximum power at about the same engine speed). However, the big difference is when you compare engine dyno available from the automakers. The Acura engine delivers better torque throughout, except between 3500 and 4000 rpm when the BMW engine has a slight edge. Better torque also allows it to deliver 20 HP more at about the same engine speed (6000 rpm).

The Acura 3.5 liter V6 is basically a lower compression (10.00:1), and greener version of the 3.2 liter V6, that is tuned to develop power early and supply 95% of the maximum torque between 2000 and 5500 rpm (the CL/TL Type-S engine does that between 2400-6200 rpm), and redline early (6200 rpm), and improve gas mileage (17/23 on MDX, 18/26 on Odyssey).

I was surprised to see Honda limiting the 2.4 liter/I-4 in CRV to get only 160 HP at 6000 rpm. And I have yet to understand why Honda chooses lower side of displacement, because 2354 cc is as much of a 2.4-liter engine as a 2445 cc engine would be. This is not the first time though. Their 2.2 liter I-4 displaced 2157 cc, which was bumped up to 2254 cc (2.3 liter) with 1998 Accord redesign, and now 2354 cc. These alone could account for 3-5% improvement in torque (and power).

However, the point was that power and torque cannot be compared as numbers like those experts did. I'm willing to bet that Honda is going to launch a 190-200 HP version of the CRV engine, if only for use in Japanese/European market (they have already showcased its 200 HP version with the RDX concept plus two small electric motors adding another 50 horses at peak). And it is unlikely that the 200 HP version will have more than 200 lb.-ft. So, in words of those automotive experts, Honda would have once again reverted back to high power low torque engine! Interesting, that they would make comments like that, while we could always say, that Japanese spec S2000 delivers 187 kW (power, 250 HP) and 218 Nm (torque, 161 lb.-ft) or just or 22 kg-m (torque). In the latter case, S2000 engine delivers 8.42 times more power than torque.

varmit

Robertsmx - To respond to your questions about the CR-V's engine there are several possibilities.

Honda may have limited the 2.4 because of engineering complications. They have to manage things like heat dissapation, smooth delivery of power, and excessive vibration. Read the Edmunds review of the CR-V for an interesting look at the "typical" large pot four banger.

There is also the possibility of an SE model coming out in a few years that has a 180 HP version of the same engine. Right now they don't need more power to gain sales. In a few years, when the hype has died down and the market is more competitive, they can introduce the model with a new engine.

tmeframe

Hi Folks - I've been a lurker for the past month, and have been watching all of the posts with great interest. I'm in my 3rd week of owning a 2002 EX auto, Mojave, and I added about every doo-dad that you can add to one of these beasties at about ½ price (I sold my MDX to reduce capital invested in cars, and I guess I still wanted some amenities! You can get Leather and NAV in the Japanese version, but I digress). I've read on this forum about the slight rocking, front-to-rear, in the driver's seat. While on a pleasure drive last weekend, something happened to the seat-frame assembly, and the seat started rocking LATERALLY as well. Additionally, there is an anomaly with the transmission that occurs when you break strongly, and take off again before forward motion has completely ceased. There's a little thunk, felt more than heard of the transmission seemingly going back into gear. Needless to say, I was distressed, and took the car in for service. I was talking to my mechanic and he relayed to me that the Odyssey's had a similar problem in the tranny, and that the Civics had a similar problem in the seats.

The transmission problem will really have to become worse before they can do much about it. The dealership's Sales Manager got involved and said there's no reason for me to put up with this, and he insisted in putting me in a loaner-car until the seat was fixed. He apparently thought that the seat could be ordered and installed in a day or two. When my mechanic tried to order the seat frame, he was told that this part was on NATIONAL BACKORDER, with no published release date. Needless to say, the mantra of Complete Customer Satisfaction only goes so far, and the Sales Manager rescinded his offer of the loaner. I can understand this, so I wasn't too unhappy. The element of this equation who absolutely chaps my _ss is American Honda.

They'd already seen a similar problem in the CIVIC seats and even issued a TSB to install strengthening-bushings on the lateral seat-supports. The 2002 CR-V apparently has a similar problem, and me thinks that Honda didn't bother to speak to the vendor who supplies the seats for their Honda cars. On top of that, they don't have any replacement seats NOW, with probably over 18000 CR-Vs in the US retail channels now (my SN# is in the 16000s, and I bought 3 weeks ago).

I've started a CSAT incident with American Honda. We'll see how they respond.

-Steve

ateixeira

Balancing a large in-line four is very tricky indeed. I believe Honda uses twin balance shafts, so there's a lot of reciprocating mass. Perhaps that's why they tuned it conservatively.

The Ody's tranny is the main reason that I'd get an extended warranty if I ended up buying one. But the previous CR-V, at least, didn't have a similar issue.

-juice

varmit

Tmeframe - Keep us posted on that. I've read a few posts on the seat issue, but this is the first I've heard about the automatic tranny.

bajie2

I remember i experienced the similar transmission problem now that tmeframe brought it up.
Basically, when you let the car go again before it fully ceased, you will feel as if you are starting a train with chained cabins.

I don't know if it's a serious problem. But it does scare me a little.

scname

Its probably not the issue but how much do you guys weight ? I'm 170 pounds and don't have a problem with seat moving.

Never felt anything wrong with the transmission either. Its a machine afterall, a little thunk when gears engage or when clutch plates touch is normal. My old Corolla does it every day and is a lot harsher, no problem at 90k miles. Its called rough shifting and used to be a lot worse. Manufacturers have done miracles damping "thunk" you felt.

Does it hurt? Of course it does, and shows up as little pieces of metal (broken off the teeth)in the transmission pan. Thats why they put little magnets in the pan to keep from circulating. Still , its just a fact of life, live with it. Your transmission can take it. (until a whole tooth falls off at 150k miles)

mikefm58

I've seen my 99 CRV do the same thing. Almost coming to a complete stop, then stepping on the gas, and it shifts into gear hard. The canned answer I got was "can't reproduce".

guyf

My 1997 was doing the same thing. My father's 1992 Accord too. I sold my CR-V at 120,000 km and the Accord is around the same mileage now. Nothing ever broke down because of this but it is annoying.

I'm surprised that a company with engineering excellence like Honda have not fixed this already.

ateixeira

That was a pretty slick way to call people overweight. ;-)

You're right, most tranny drain plugs are magnetic and you'll often find metal shavings on them.

Honda focuses on motors, but maybe it's time to do a little R&D on transmissions. The Odyssey has gotten better at least, but there's room for improvement.

-juice

canadiancl

have always been Honda's achilles heel. They just seem a step behind the competition. Remember those crude 2-speed semi-automatic they had for the early Civics. Our family had an '82 Accord and the auto tranny on that thing would clunk, thunk, jerk, shudder with every shift. Never broke down, but what a crude and annoying piece of work!

varmit

I'm assuming that Tmeframe's complaint was for a more serious "thunk" than the usual slushbox jiggle. I drive a 5 speed (the "blessed 5 speed"). So I can't comment from experience.

Honda has never made exceptional automatic transmissions. If the reviews are any indication, the one in the new CR-V is one of their best. It has been praised for it's smooth operation in more than one article. However, it wouldn't be all that surprising if Tmeframe is right and there are problems with it. No car is perfect. Not even a Honda. I'm sure we'll see more of these issues during the first year.

varmit

Woops. CanadianCl beat me to the point.

(Hey, have you checked out the '03 CL? According to Edmunds, they added ATTS.)

ateixeira

Saw that, varmit. Is that going to be put on the TL too?

Slap on the front LSD (they gave it the fancy ATTS name) and a 6 speed and the TL would fall on our list of sedans under consideration.

-juice

varmit

I suspect not. The current TL-S is enough as it is. They don't need help selling it. The CL, on the other hand, needed a little kick in the pants.

When I first read about the upgrades, I'd read that it would have an "LSD". I was not impressed. However, Edmunds describes the functionality exactly like the ATTS we saw on the Prelude. It's not the same as an ordinary LSD, which is why performance enthusiasts raved about it on the Prelude. IMHO, it makes the best of a FWD car.

diploid

"First Impression: A front-wheel-drive BMW."

guyf

See this link from Canadian Driver:

http://www.canadiandriver.com/news/020131-1.htm

richk4

I own a 02 EX. The openings in the front wheel wells concern me. Being able to see right through to the other side. Could these openings cause corrosion problems by allowing road salt on some engine components? Would driving in heavy snow invite snow packing in the openings? It looks like these openings were designed to allow room for the front suspension components, but looks to me like they might invite problems. Does anyone have any opinions on this?

varmit

1) Put your CR-V, or any other car, up on a lift.
2) Look under the car.
3) Notice that you can see the entire engine compartment exposed under there.
4) Think about it.

Seriously, there are plenty of cars that have similar openings. Someone on this thread asked Honda about it a while ago. They responded by saying that the vehicle had been tested under all conditions, blah, blah, blah... They also remarked that the opening actually help keep things cleaner! I dunno about that. Our best guess was that there was more airflow to clean out the compartment. But we also know that the Civic is designed the same way and there have been no problems with that car over the past year.

richk4

Thanks, Varmit for your info.

canadiancl

I too tend to agree that Honda must have done its homework before putting that hole in there, and chances are there wouldn't be any problem down there road. However(!), even though the engine is exposed on the underside, there is no tire kicking up dirt and whatever else thru the underside like there is in the wheelwells. Like Arsenio Hall used to say, just one of those things that make you go "Hmmmm..."

rockycow

My wife's brother and I picked up a car from Mark Robert's Honda in Bartlesville, OK. Drove to Denver then drove it around Denver for a week. Thurs. He left Denver when the arctic front hit town, but due to 15 degree temps and snow on the road his windshield washers froze on the way to Albuquerque. He had to use his drinking water supply to clean the windshield about 5 times.

-Does the wiper fluid come from the factory or from the dealer?
-Do you think the wheel well hole had anything to do with this?
-Just looking for opinions.
rockycow

theracoon

> -Does the wiper fluid come from the factory or from the dealer?

I don't know if Honda fills them at the factory. Even if the dealer added it, the fluid was probably Honda brand.

> -Do you think the wheel well hole had anything to do with this?

No.

Since it gets below Zero F here from time to time, I suspect what happened is that ice built up on the nozzles, not that the washer fluid froze. At least I've never had any washer fluid freeze, even when it got to -27 F a few winters back.

JM2C

wellresearched

No vehicle can compensate for ice storms.
I had the misfortune to be driving (a rental car) during that ice storm as it passed through New York State.

The car became encrusted in 3/4 inches of solid ice. Cars were stopped everywhere with people cleaning off their windshields.

My wipers were solid sticks of ice!

Give me snow, but ice is the worst. We were all foolish to be on the highway in the first place.

Be glad his CRV stayed on the road!

tomf11

My first winter with the awd and first impression's.

These cars need a more aggessive tire's,( snow tire's). I am used to driveing 4x4's, with snow tires.

I think the underbody clearance is sufficient so that you would not get high centered,with the CR-v, I just don't trust it in neighborhood's where the plow has not been. 7-8 inches.

angelica2

When I bought the 02 CRV I wondered why Honda didn't increase the tire size of the new version. The tires look a little whimpy next to the new bulkier body style. I didn't give it much thought and figured I could go bigger when I replaced the tires. Well, when I went to a research this idea I was told that the specs on on the vehicle only allowed for a tire that was a little wider but nothing taller. The guy at the tire store told me that a bigger tire could cause problems with the transmission and the calibration of the vehicle. Well, I went into the dealer last week and saw a 02 LX model on the show room floor. I saw that they added 16" rims and 16" tires to the 02 CRV-LX. They also added leather and tinted windows. Just a side note (off my subject): they wanted $1,995.00 for the rims and tires, $1,995.00 for the leather and $800.00 for the tinted windows. In addition, they added a $2,000.00 mark-up. I believe the grand total sticker was 26,500 for the LX. (Nobody was lining up to purchase this show room gem). Anyway, back to my tire question, can you or can you not change the tire size and/or rim size on this vehicle. I have to admit that the tires looked great and the size fit the car much better. If it turns out that it's not a mechanically problem, I will definitely replace the tires and rims when the original tires need replacing. I would appreciate any input. Thanks!