By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Actually, I had the reverse reaction. I was more skeptical of Bush's Iraq "policy" before I heard Scott Ritter.
tidester, host
Really?
Do you not find Ritter credible?
For me it isn't Ritter alone that has made me a little skeptical.... it includes liberals and conservatives that have eluded to such skeptism not too mention most world leaders.
Including...
-Pat Buchanan (whom calls this policy neo-conservative)
-Dick Army (whom up to the last few days opposed Bush)
-the late Paul Wellstone
-most other countries
to name a very few....
(However, this is my first winter with my 2000 EX so I can't compare the performance with that of the Duelers)
I did look at the Yokahoma touring and Aegis LS4. I decided against the Touring because of their lower snow traction as rated from Consumer reports. I decided against the Aegis LS4 because I could only get them by special order from local stores or Tirerack and didn't want to go through the hassle of ordering a new one if one was damaged. I paid $95 each for the Harmonies.
Lok888 - Could you please elaborate on post 9352. I have no idea what you mean. Thanks.
Steve - Not to discredit Toyota (I fully expect that they will try to make that goal), but 2012 is a long way off and such a statement is really just PR. A lot can happen in that time. Not long ago Ford promised to raise the fuel economy of their truck fleet by 25%. A bad set of tires and one reckless CEO later... and they can't afford to do it.
Steve, Host
Not at all. His position has changed exactly 180° with said change occuring after he was out of the intelligence loop. When he had the facts he espoused one thing and when he doesn't have the facts he espouses the opposite. Don't you find that strange? Also, as a guest of the Iraqi government his credibility becomes even more strained.
There are good reasons to be skeptical of the Bush policy but Ritter is most certainly not one of them.
tidester, host
:-)
tidester, host
I am not sure I follow you.... please explain his 180.
Ritter said there are weapons left in 98, today he says there still are weapons left. He believes there are alternatives to a full out war with Iraq.
In addition he was a visitor of the Iraqi government, the same as those congressmen who went over there. Ritter was sponsored by peace groups in the United States, not the Iraqi government. If Ritter was paid by the Iraqi gov't then I am sure the US intelligence would point that out and would seize him immediately.
19 of the terrorist came from Saudi Arabia, they caused 3,000 deaths last year. I think Saudi Arabia is more of a threat. Oh, I almost forgot, if we attacked Saudi Arabia they would pull out of our markets. They currently have 200 billion dollars in our market.
What is that our priority?
I am considering the same move on my '02. Now let me ask you, and please answer as honestly and un-biased as you possibly can, on a scale of 1-10, 1 = original loud road noise and 10 = cadillac plush quietness, where would you place the Harmony?
Thanks!
lok888,
I have seen the RAV4 EV vehicle in NYC and Boston, I think the price tag on them is pushing high, getting close to 40 grand!!!
Not exactly economical!
XC90 at $45000 it should be.Now for us poor folks
how about an umder $25000 SUV shootout.Just because you can lease a $45000 car,should you?
He used to say Iraq is a grave threat. He now contends Iraq is not threat. That is a 180!
Back on topic: Which SUV would arms inspectors choose? :-)
tidester, host
A fleet of Honda CRV's of course!
Now how did I KNOW you were going to say that? ;-)
tidester, host
Sooooooo... Don't hold your breath for a V6 or hybrid. I think any SE would include things like nicer trim, upgraded seats (maybe heated leather?), better audio, and other add-on stuff... already in production in non-USA models.
Just a guess!
Frankly, I think Honda is quite happy with the demand the CR-V still has, especially as the Escape & Vue are SIGNIFICANTLY better values, with the special deals.
My hunch is that the Liberty's sales numbers are the only disappointment in the whole "kinda small" ute group....
Mjsnd80 - Absolutely. There is potential for a power boost (maybe 180hp), but certainly not a V6. Most SE additions will be cosmetic or just extra gadgets.
What should this cost?
thanks.
Steve, Host
Steve, Host
If Fox News was correct then Ritter would be in jail right now for treason.
We could get it less in Tulsa, OK. ($22,280 or little bits less...)
It's red (that I wanted) and we only waited one day for delivery.
I have not seen the car yet.
(The car and my husband are in NY.)
He says so far no problem...
oh, he took the center rear seat head-rest, otherwise he cannot get good rear view.(that's he said.)
It will be my car, he can keeps his fancy Mercury Mountaineer V8 AWD. ( I don't like the ride, it gives me back ache. Also the mileage is terrible, best highway was 15.3mpg.)
I will see MY CR-V this Friday...yeah!!!
Probably a random problem, sorry to hear about it. How much will it run you???
I am not sure that is true though I don't know the details of the financing.
tidester, host
Ok, foxnews and its pundits (pretty much cable news in general) have been notorious for mis-reporting things. Look at the energy crisis the summer before the 2000 elections, Gov. Davis has created an energy crisis! Crisis! Crisis! All the hour long reports and such pretty much maid Gov. Davis look to be the reason for the crisis.
Accepted by everyone today, Enron created a demand problem so they could profit, one part of their huge scandal. Watch C-SPAN for news, watch Foxnews and other cable news take it as a grain of salt. If you don't take it with a grain of salt you might as well be watching a mid-morning talk show like "Jerry Springer" or read the tabloids. Pundits are paid opinionist who have their own motivation.
If I go and search the internet I will find that Bush and Israel created the 911 attacks to profit from it fininacially and politically. You know what??? That IS complete Bull #@#$@ and isn't true, we all know that! Of course he didn't do such a thing. So go surf the net and find bogus information and take it serious..... that is your choice. I choose to follow C-Span and get the news straight up without all the filters in the media.
BTW: The head of the CIA in 98 (after the inspectors were thrown out) claimed Iraq was a threat. Clinton bombed away, Conservatives cried, "He is only drawing the media away from Lewinski and the scandals, he can't justify these bombongs!" Subsequently public pressure along with conservative pressure stopped the bombing. Don't get me wrong here, I support conservative ideas and politics when the issue at hand warrants it.
Did you watch the head of CIA at the senate hearing within a week of the Iraq resolution vote in October of 2002? The head of the CIA stated very clearly that there is no proof that Iraq is an immediate threat! He went on to say, In the future, 3 to 5 years, "maybe, there is a good chance".
See the parrallel between Ritters and the head of the CIA's opnion.... I am sure the footage of the recent CIA statement is on file at C-span.com
They both did a 180.
Sorry this off topic again but I dropped this after Tidesters post #9370 but it was brought up again subsequently.
BTW, the CRV handled the snow this morning like a champ!
Slow
I agree with you this is a CRV room. Some things were brought up and sometimes things in these rooms get off topic. Not this off topic, but off topic.
In my opinion: In fairness to those who disagree with me, they should be allowed one rebuttal then I think this issue should be dropped or taken elsewhere.
I have used 87 octane in my CRV's since 1998 and I never used anything above 87. To my understanding, if you use a higher octane the timing of the engine wont be matched with the fuel correctly. So it may not give you the cost saving features one might expect.
Some people claim it does increase performance, I can't vouch for that because I have never tried.
Slow43 - The CR-V's engine is not designed to take advantage of higher octane fuel.
My friend just got a 60k regular scheduled maintenance and was charged $550! I don't remember mine costing that much. How much have you all been paying???
I just paid $247 (minus 10% coupon and plus tax) for my 30K check here in the Denver area.
Not that it is a good comparison for the rest of the country, but my 2000 EX runs just fine with 85 octane gas at 5000 feet elevation.
Moral to the story, as long as it doesn't knock, for the highest gas mileage, go with the lowest octane.
Of course, I could be wrong :-)
The CR-V is designed to run on 87 octane. You will see no benefit from a higher octane fuel. Save your money.