New car smell is usually PVC Flexible (vinyl), formaldehyde and other noxious chemicals outgassing from the materials and adhesives used in manufacturing the car - ever walk into a fabric store or Ikea? The fumes will knock you out after 20 minutes.
Best to leave the windows down as much as you can the first few months of ownership!
If you're really addicted to the stuff, those little "evergreen tree" air fresheners are pure formaldehyde (at least they used to be....). Steve Host SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
Dairymaid, I think you got a pretty good deal on that new LX. The best I could do shopping in NY was 500 off msrp, so I went with a demo EX instead. I looked and went everywhere too. The dealers wouldn't go down. One dealer even told my brother the price is msrp and if you don't like it have a nice day....... Did you trade a car in with that deal? I would be curious to see if the dealer made up for the difference with the trade.
A while back I though I noticed a post about Honda switching from Bridgestone to another brand of tires on new CR-Vs. Did they? And what was their reason for switching? Was it because the Duellers were to noisy?
AS I 've mentioned before, I got 2 prices,one in S Jersey,one in Philly @ $735 of on EX,plus discounted prices on roof racks,side steps & body cladding. Tires: I am hoping that when mine arrives in June that Honda will have switched to the NEW Dueller HL's. Otherwise, I am going to try to trade out to these via a friend in the tire business.
Thanks for the info on the "new" car smell. I think I am either lucky because the smell is never there so it doesn't really exist. Or my nose is so used to the toxic fumes that I don't even notice it anymore. I really hope it is the former.
This price was quoted over the internet and I was told that the "Internet Approved Product Specialist" (the appointed salesman) would honor the quote. I did not trade my present 94 Civic. In the past I have just sold my cars outright, but this one will stay in the family as an extra.
Well, as I understand it, many of the chemical room deodorizers generally don't kill the odors but work by deadening the receptors in your nose, so....
Of course you're talking to a guy who used to play with mercury, chlordane and carbon tet in his younger (& dumber) days. No wonder I have so many senior moments! Steve Host SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
I used to be able to induce front wheelspin easily with a quick start from a stoplight on wet pavement, causing RT4WD to kick in. Now I have to look harder for ways to put that rear differential to work. The stock H/Ts would squeal when when pushed hard around a corner. Today I think the CR-V itself would "give way" before the H/Ls would -- drive sane! I also like the raised white-letter look. As a bonus, my steering became more precise too.
With the exception of price, the Bridgestone Dueler H/Ls have been notably better performers than the stock H/Ts from Honda in every way I can think of -- wet traction, dry traction, cornering, control, treadlife rating, noise. Take your pick of any of those as a reason for Honda (or current owners) to switch.
Just got back from camping (in a motorhome) but towed the V and actually did use the table in the back several different times. We set it up outside and cooked soup in a crockpot on it and then brought it inside when it was raining and played cards on it. (Very sturdy little table.)
Also have checked the third tank of gas for mileage and it is averaging out to about 22 + mpg (varied speeds/conditions.) I'm sure that straight highway driving would come out to be closer to 28. And I certainly like the giddy up the little Honda has on the freeway - plenty of power to pass, etc. had to hold her down as she wants to run at 80! Fun car to drive :-).
I have a 2002 CRV with Honda's fog lights. The dealer had to replace both of the plastic trim pieces around the lens. He said that they crumbled in his hands. I was wondering if the lights got too hot for the trim pieces. Has anyone else had this problem ?
Coincidentally I just read an article that talked about how the new car smell most are familiar with is going away as new materials are being used. These new materials don't give off as much odor, hence less of that "new car smell", which was really chemicals.
FWIW my CR-V had the new car smell (easy to notice after driving a 13 year old vehicle), but after a weeklong trip with three passengers in 80+ degree weather, the smell now isn't what I'd call new ;-) .
Dairymaid--Congratulations on your new wheels! We are sure you will enjoy it. Ought to give you years of good service. Glad the purchasing experience wasn't too exasperating/frustrating/agravating. danandkat
I've had my Silver 02 CR-V EX for two months now. Well, I think it's mine. My wife only let me drive it on the weekends. :-( She has a longer commute to work. Currently getting 25mpg with a mix of city and highway.
The light comes on too early IMHO. It comes on around 12 gallons and stays on. The CR-V holds 15.3 gal. I still have a lot of gas left, Oh well, I guess I could adjust to this.
Yes i have noticed that the fuel light comes on too early too when....... I filled up I checked and I put in about 12 gallons also. So Now i know when that needle is on low I still have about 3 gallons left.
I had the strangest thing happen the other day. I drove through spilled paint on the road and when I got home I noticed that it was all over my wheel wells, white splatter.....I was so mad. I could not get it off with anything I tried. It was cold and whatever it was hardened quick. I had no choice but to use paint thinner to get it off and it took forever, Luckily it didn't harm the finish. What idiot drops a can of paint in the road?
The low fuel light in the '02 CR-V is a new type, it explains it in the manual. Once illuminated it stays that way as opposed to previous which would go off and on for a little while. As to how much is left in the tank, at one time Honda specified it based on two points, when the light was completely illuminated and when the needle was on E. I think on E there is 1.2 US gals left or something like that. The most I have put in my CR-V is 12.9 gallons.
Geenee - I had something similar happen with concrete. A truck had dropped a bag of the dry powder on the highway. I drove through it and got the powder all over one side of the car and in the mudflaps. It rained later that day and the dust got wet, then hardened on my poor CR-V. :-(
I think C&D also noticed a little torque steer. The CR-V starts out as FWD, so the front axle is getting the full 162 lb-ft. The short gearing exacerbates it a bit.
So why doesn't a WRX have torque steer, given its 217 lb-ft? Well, the front axle gets just half of that, or about 109 lb-ft, since the AWD is full-time, even when there is no slippage.
But I imagine the CR-V's torque steer is nothing next to an Altima - which sends 246 lb-ft to the front axle. Even with overboosted steering it gives a nice tug at the wheel. Nissan really needs something like ATTS.
It's inevitable with all the construction going on here. Dried concrete covers the bottom of my CR-V and the wheel wells. Maybe that will hold off the corrosion from the wheel well holes ;-).
You know that most sound insulation is made from an asphault-like material. Well, how about using concrete (another material for road construction) to silence the tire noise in older CR-Vs!!! Who wants to be first?
Juice - As I understand it, torque steer isn't eliminated with the use of AWD, it simply spreads the power around to the point where the "tug" on the wheel is no longer noticeable. It fails to meet the standards of the "just noticeable difference" principle. (No, I'm not making that up.)
At slow speed I've noticed the steering wheel can be moved a lot either way without affecting the direction of travel greatly. Yes, keeping it turned to one side or the other, the car will start to go that way, but there seems to be a lot of play at slow speeds. Is this related to torque steer?
Different thing. I don't know if they still call it "speed-sensitive" steering but that's what it is. The steering wheel is easier to maneuver at low speeds like when parking, harder at higher speeds. When I was on my recent trip I had someone reach over and do the steering (don't try this at home) on the highway while I was driving and they remarked how tight the steering felt.
Actually, there is such a thing and it has been measured. The human senses are only so acute. For example, the human eye is only so sensitive. It can pic up up the difference between 50 and 51 candles, but not the difference between 100 and 101 candles. I believe it's called the "theory of the just noticeable difference", or something like that. If you saw the real name, you recognize it (or not notice the difference).
Maybe the WRX isn't a good example of this, but you get the idea. The torque steer is still there, it's just dumbed-down by the power directed to the other axle. You can't tell the difference because, as far as real-world driving goes, it's purely a technicallity.
Varmit what did you do to get the concrete off your CR-V. I was very nervous about using the paint thinner on my new CR-V, but really had no choice nothing would take off that white stuff... I think it was paint but should have been a compound of some sort since it hardened so quickly.
Geenee - The mighty credit card. I tried to avoid using a solvent. I couldn't think of one that would dissolve concrete anyway. The concrete on the paint just "chipped off". That wasn't too hard. The stuff stuck to the plastics was harder to remove. The textured surface made it more difficult and it required more elbow grease.
Muckyduck - Sounds like torque steer. The dreaded PTTR happens mostly at highway speeds and does not correlate with acceleration. It can happen even when coasting at high speed. Most folks have cured it with a proper alignment and shot of penicillin.
Found this on howstuffworks.com about torque steer:
"The annoying tendency of some front-wheel drive vehicles to pull to one side when engine torque is applied. In other words, you step on the gas and the car wants to steer right or left. By redesigning the power train to use equal length half shafts between the transaxle and wheels, the tendency towards torque steer can be greatly reduced. The other cure is to keep off the gas."
Obviously one techie's definition, hardly textbook, and generalized for sure. But the WRX does have a longitudinal engine layout (north-south) and equal length half shafts, so maybe there is no torque steer.
The CR-V uses the more common transverse layout (side-to-side), but I'm not sure about the half shafts. Anyone?
I say we take this theory to the track. What do you think, Edmunds provides the vehicles and we wring 'em out? Who cares what we learn, that would be fun! ;-)
Yeah, I'm with you there, juice. I would have loved to have attended one of those shindigs if they had one anywhere within hollering distance of Houston.
varmint: Someone's gotta show those Chevy guys whose vehicles are "like a rock." <GRIN>
The CRV is definetly a torquer. Wet weather torque steer is something I've noticed. It seems to me that the Auto trans has a higher stall speed, this allows the engine to rev up more from a start, thus more available torque. Plus the lower final drive ratio helps too. The WRX has another reason for a lack of torque steer, lower compression and turbo lag. Your initial off the line output is lower until the turbo spins up, then you start applying torque, after the car is moving. The 50-50 AWD also helps keep torque steer down. Once had a LeBaron 2.2 turbo years ago.
I still have my EdmundsLive T-shirt. Too bad I didn't get to go to any of the events and drive the cars :-(. Steve Host SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
Hi just wondering if any one with the 2002 CR-V EX,when using the rear window wiper did it leave a scratch on the rear window going in the same direction of the wiper.What I'm I surpose to do call the dealer?
Ssoto - Check and make sure there isn't a pebble or some other hard/sharp object stuck in your rear wiper blade. I recommend using Rain X or a similar product to help provide a buffer against that sort of thing.
When I had my Explorer I drove through a fresh paint spill of white paint.It may have been latex since it came off pretty easy.Before I found out it would come off fairly easy I took it to my insurance agent and they covered it for a complete detail for $250.I had $100 deductible so they gave me a check for $150.That's what insurance is for.My present CRV must have a teflon coating becasue nothing sticks to it. This car was a showcar at the International Auto show and had all the extras and I have to guess they gave it the treatment to protect it from all the grubby hands there.
It is amazing to me how many people have had an experience with a paint spill and thier cars. I have never had that experience until of course I am driving my brand new 20,000 CR-V. What luck. Luckily none of the white splatter actually got on the paint only the black plastic in the wheel wells.
I haven't experienced any scratches on my rear window due to the rear wiper.
Teflon has been acknowledged as not being effective when "applied" to a car. Teflon must be applied at extremely high temperatures and can't be applied to a car's paint.
BTW, my parents are going to get their '02 CR-V LX (zircon blue) today! They're very excited. Has anybody heard of a new "Touring Edition"? What is sounds like to me is a normal LX with standard keyless, alarm, mud guards, hood deflector, and tonneau cover. Oh, and some "Touring Edition" badge/sticker. I managed to talk the dealer into "making" their normal LX into one of these Touring editions. Should be interesting.
After seeing C&D Television review a $35K Highlander I stopped by their topic. Sure enough the most recent message mentioned the CR-V and it's lack of a V6. Well I don't know about everyone else but I'm pretty happy with the power of my vehicle especially knowing it cost me $14K less than the HL. Of course I had to tell them.
LOL. Carguy, you aren't picking another fight are you?
I'm interested in the Highlander because it offers a 4 cyl. The new CR-V is great, but I'm looking at the Pilot and Highlander because I need a bit more luggage space for my greyhounds. The Pilot may be too much vehicle for me and (if Toyota options it properly) the 4 cyl Highlander might be a good compromise.
It's funny the way the market works. Given a choice between a 4 cyl CR-V and the 4 cyl Highlander, many people take the CR-V because of its value. When you start with the six cyl Hihglander, many people will take the Pilot, which offers more utility. I'm an exception to that, but Toyota may find their market stolen out from under them.
How odd....I ended up ordering my 2002 CRV because I couldn't get the 'base' model Highlander I wanted. I figured a 4 cylnder would be plenty peppy for a CRV, but wouldn't a Highlander be alot more sluggish? Now I'm going to kick myself.....
I have pretty much decided on the CR-V over the Highlander. I don't need the extra room in the Highlander, but I do like the available stability control and the higher level of interior refinement. I would be willing to pay somewhat extra for that. But based on my discussions with Toyota dealers, to get the side airbags and stability control, I would have to take many other options, and the resulting price is over $31,000. That's more of a premium than I want to pay. In theory one can special order a Highlander, but apparently not all Toyota dealers will do that.
Since I like the CR-V a great deal, I don't feel like I'm compromising much at all. But if Toyota had a $27,000 basic Highlander with side airbags and stability control, I would seriously consider it.
Hosts: tell them we'll sign disclaimers. I disclaim any responsibility! :-)
Edmunds Live was a riot. Please, please bring it back!
We're shopping for Highlanders, too. I may test drive one tomorrow and I'll share my impressions. Toyota does options a-la-carte, though, and once you load 'em up the prices go up. Still, the warranty is longer, resale ought to be great, and I prefer the full-time AWD. No 5 speed is the catch.
The wife wants to try an Accord, so I'll show her a CR-V too. I'm not sure either SUV will be sporty enough for her, however, we'll see. Also, they're still charging MSRP around DC, mostly. HLs have come down in price significantly.
Also considering Altima, Camry, and Legacy, and maybe the 2003 Forester if we can wait that long. Maybe, just maybe, a Passat, too. I'm selling her 626 today, so we'll start shopping tomorrow. Meanwhile, we have 2 other cars so no major rush.
I am thinking about upgrading the stock speakers to something with more range. Has anybody done this? Is it worth the money? What did you replace the stock speakers with?
I am thinking about Infinity Reference 652i. Anybody have experience with these?
I seriously considered it when I bought my 02EX last year. The Highlander V6 equiped like the EX cost only $9000 more but it drove like a large fat sedan. The CRV's nimble handling, small turning circle won me over. I do a lot of U turns on narrow streets.
I've priced both recently and at real-world prices they're not that far apart. The catch is to find a lightly equipped Highlander.
A CR-V EX automatic runs near MSRP, TMV is $22.6 but oddly I'm finding they run $22.8 at local no-haggle dealers?
Any how, I can find no-haggle dealers selling Highlanders for $700 over invoice, which shrinks the difference significantly. I realize the CR-V may drop in price later, but I'm shopping right now, actively.
So I spec'd out a 4 cyl AWD Highlander with moonroof and side air bags, and come up to $24.6k. I'd order keyless and install it myself for a couple hundred, since it's not sold alone. That doesn't include alloys, but I'd actually prefer 16" steel vs. 15" alloy on the CR-V.
So it's about $2 grand in that case, and the Toy has a longer warranty, full-time AWD, much more payload and 100% more towing capacity. I realize not everyone needs those things, but for those who do the $2 grand seems like a bargain.
A V6 is about $1400 more, still, close. We'll try the 4 banger since torque is actually not bad at
I can easily see someone choosing the CR-V for its clever packaging and efficient powertrain, but many will find it's worth the stretch to get a mid-sizer with a heavy duty payload.
I may have to order one if that's what we choose, though, because most of them are optioned up with many features the CR-V doesn't even offer.
Another option is delete AWD and save $1200, then add VSC for $559. AWD beats traction control IMO, but VSC adds stability control, too.
Comments
Best to leave the windows down as much as you can the first few months of ownership!
If you're really addicted to the stuff, those little "evergreen tree" air fresheners are pure formaldehyde (at least they used to be....).
Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
Tires: I am hoping that when mine arrives in June that Honda will have switched to the NEW Dueller HL's. Otherwise, I am going to try to trade out to these via a friend in the tire business.
Of course you're talking to a guy who used to play with mercury, chlordane and carbon tet in his younger (& dumber) days. No wonder I have so many senior moments!
Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
tidester
Host
SUVs
With the exception of price, the Bridgestone Dueler H/Ls have been notably better performers than the stock H/Ts from Honda in every way I can think of -- wet traction, dry traction, cornering, control, treadlife rating, noise. Take your pick of any of those as a reason for Honda (or current owners) to switch.
Just got back from camping (in a motorhome) but towed the V and actually did use the table in the back several different times. We set it up outside and cooked soup in a crockpot on it and then brought it inside when it was raining and played cards on it. (Very sturdy little table.)
Also have checked the third tank of gas for mileage and it is averaging out to about 22 + mpg (varied speeds/conditions.) I'm sure that straight highway driving would come out to be closer to 28.
And I certainly like the giddy up the little Honda has on the freeway - plenty of power to pass, etc. had to hold her down as she wants to run at 80! Fun car to drive :-).
FWIW my CR-V had the new car smell (easy to notice after driving a 13 year old vehicle), but after a weeklong trip with three passengers in 80+ degree weather, the smell now isn't what I'd call new ;-) .
The light comes on too early IMHO. It comes on around 12 gallons and stays on. The CR-V holds 15.3 gal. I still have a lot of gas left, Oh well, I guess I could adjust to this.
I had the strangest thing happen the other day. I drove through spilled paint on the road and when I got home I noticed that it was all over my wheel wells, white splatter.....I was so mad. I could not get it off with anything I tried. It was cold and whatever it was hardened quick. I had no choice but to use paint thinner to get it off and it took forever, Luckily it didn't harm the finish. What idiot drops a can of paint in the road?
The low fuel light in the '02 CR-V is a new type, it explains it in the manual. Once illuminated it stays that way as opposed to previous which would go off and on for a little while. As to how much is left in the tank, at one time Honda specified it based on two points, when the light was completely illuminated and when the needle was on E. I think on E there is 1.2 US gals left or something like that. The most I have put in my CR-V is 12.9 gallons.
So why doesn't a WRX have torque steer, given its 217 lb-ft? Well, the front axle gets just half of that, or about 109 lb-ft, since the AWD is full-time, even when there is no slippage.
But I imagine the CR-V's torque steer is nothing next to an Altima - which sends 246 lb-ft to the front axle. Even with overboosted steering it gives a nice tug at the wheel. Nissan really needs something like ATTS.
-juice
Or get the optional cladding and mud guards for the lower portion of the body. Dried cement scrapes right off.
-juice
Juice - As I understand it, torque steer isn't eliminated with the use of AWD, it simply spreads the power around to the point where the "tug" on the wheel is no longer noticeable. It fails to meet the standards of the "just noticeable difference" principle. (No, I'm not making that up.)
It's all relative. Drive the Altima first, and you will say the CR-V does not have any torque steer.
-juice
Maybe the WRX isn't a good example of this, but you get the idea. The torque steer is still there, it's just dumbed-down by the power directed to the other axle. You can't tell the difference because, as far as real-world driving goes, it's purely a technicallity.
I do notice a pull to the right when accelerating - is that the 'pull to the right' problem people have mentioned or is that 'torque steer'?
Muckyduck - Sounds like torque steer. The dreaded PTTR happens mostly at highway speeds and does not correlate with acceleration. It can happen even when coasting at high speed. Most folks have cured it with a proper alignment and shot of penicillin.
"The annoying tendency of some front-wheel drive vehicles to pull to one side when engine torque is applied. In other words, you step on the gas and the car wants to steer right or left. By redesigning the power train to use equal length half shafts between the transaxle and wheels, the tendency towards torque steer can be greatly reduced. The other cure is to keep off the gas."
Obviously one techie's definition, hardly textbook, and generalized for sure. But the WRX does have a longitudinal engine layout (north-south) and equal length half shafts, so maybe there is no torque steer.
The CR-V uses the more common transverse layout (side-to-side), but I'm not sure about the half shafts. Anyone?
I say we take this theory to the track. What do you think, Edmunds provides the vehicles and we wring 'em out? Who cares what we learn, that would be fun! ;-)
-juice
varmint: Someone's gotta show those Chevy guys whose vehicles are "like a rock." <GRIN>
I took your suggestion all the way to the top and the idea was well received until the lawyers nixed it - something about liability! ;-)
tidester
Host
SUVs
Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
paint spill of white paint.It may have been latex since it came off pretty easy.Before I found out
it would come off fairly easy I took it to my
insurance agent and they covered it for a complete detail for $250.I had $100 deductible
so they gave me a check for $150.That's what insurance is for.My present CRV must have a teflon coating becasue nothing sticks to it.
This car was a showcar at the International
Auto show and had all the extras and I have to
guess they gave it the treatment to protect it
from all the grubby hands there.
I haven't experienced any scratches on my rear window due to the rear wiper.
BTW, my parents are going to get their '02 CR-V LX (zircon blue) today! They're very excited. Has anybody heard of a new "Touring Edition"? What is sounds like to me is a normal LX with standard keyless, alarm, mud guards, hood deflector, and tonneau cover. Oh, and some "Touring Edition" badge/sticker. I managed to talk the dealer into "making" their normal LX into one of these Touring editions. Should be interesting.
I'm interested in the Highlander because it offers a 4 cyl. The new CR-V is great, but I'm looking at the Pilot and Highlander because I need a bit more luggage space for my greyhounds. The Pilot may be too much vehicle for me and (if Toyota options it properly) the 4 cyl Highlander might be a good compromise.
It's funny the way the market works. Given a choice between a 4 cyl CR-V and the 4 cyl Highlander, many people take the CR-V because of its value. When you start with the six cyl Hihglander, many people will take the Pilot, which offers more utility. I'm an exception to that, but Toyota may find their market stolen out from under them.
I have pretty much decided on the CR-V over the Highlander. I don't need the extra room in the Highlander, but I do like the available stability control and the higher level of interior refinement. I would be willing to pay somewhat extra for that. But based on my discussions with Toyota dealers, to get the side airbags and stability control, I would have to take many other options, and the resulting price is over $31,000. That's more of a premium than I want to pay. In theory one can special order a Highlander, but apparently not all Toyota dealers will do that.
Since I like the CR-V a great deal, I don't feel like I'm compromising much at all. But if Toyota had a $27,000 basic Highlander with side airbags and stability control, I would seriously consider it.
Edmunds Live was a riot. Please, please bring it back!
We're shopping for Highlanders, too. I may test drive one tomorrow and I'll share my impressions. Toyota does options a-la-carte, though, and once you load 'em up the prices go up. Still, the warranty is longer, resale ought to be great, and I prefer the full-time AWD. No 5 speed is the catch.
The wife wants to try an Accord, so I'll show her a CR-V too. I'm not sure either SUV will be sporty enough for her, however, we'll see. Also, they're still charging MSRP around DC, mostly. HLs have come down in price significantly.
Also considering Altima, Camry, and Legacy, and maybe the 2003 Forester if we can wait that long. Maybe, just maybe, a Passat, too. I'm selling her 626 today, so we'll start shopping tomorrow. Meanwhile, we have 2 other cars so no major rush.
Pretty exciting.
-juice
I am thinking about Infinity Reference 652i. Anybody have experience with these?
Thanks....
may be you need a NAV system too, just kidding:)
A CR-V EX automatic runs near MSRP, TMV is $22.6 but oddly I'm finding they run $22.8 at local no-haggle dealers?
Any how, I can find no-haggle dealers selling Highlanders for $700 over invoice, which shrinks the difference significantly. I realize the CR-V may drop in price later, but I'm shopping right now, actively.
So I spec'd out a 4 cyl AWD Highlander with moonroof and side air bags, and come up to $24.6k. I'd order keyless and install it myself for a couple hundred, since it's not sold alone. That doesn't include alloys, but I'd actually prefer 16" steel vs. 15" alloy on the CR-V.
So it's about $2 grand in that case, and the Toy has a longer warranty, full-time AWD, much more payload and 100% more towing capacity. I realize not everyone needs those things, but for those who do the $2 grand seems like a bargain.
A V6 is about $1400 more, still, close. We'll try the 4 banger since torque is actually not bad at
I can easily see someone choosing the CR-V for its clever packaging and efficient powertrain, but many will find it's worth the stretch to get a mid-sizer with a heavy duty payload.
I may have to order one if that's what we choose, though, because most of them are optioned up with many features the CR-V doesn't even offer.
Another option is delete AWD and save $1200, then add VSC for $559. AWD beats traction control IMO, but VSC adds stability control, too.
-juice