I would plan on using the CR-V mainly for driving on old logging roads in the mountains. The road conditions would be washboard, ruts, some mud, some rocky sections, but nothing extreme. Sounds like I would be OK as long as I don't get carried away and exceed the ground clearance.
I swapped tires on my Forester and got a bigger lift than I had estimated using tire size calculations.
It was really funny, I mounted tires on one side first, then put a level to see how much higher that side was. It was about 3/4" when I measured the wheel wells!
Original was 205/70R15, I went to 225/60R16. Using this tool:
This shows the new tire next to the old one. You have to remember the old tire is mounted so the difference it exaggerated, but still, the new tire is taller and deflects less.
Someone crawl under their 2005 CR-V and measure the distance from the ground to the rear differential. I bet it's more than 8.1".
As per tidester I am moving my discussion to this forum. Any feedback is appreciated. tks!
I've got great winter tires Toyo Observe Plus, they really rip through the winter snow. 6000km and no probs so far.
I am now looking for good Summer tires, for dry/wet/and occasional unpaved roads. Checked out Tirerack but they actually suggest Bridgestones, which I cannot believe. Don't trust them. Too many bad reviewer ratings. Another suggestion was the GoodYear Comfort tread. Does anybody have a suggestion?
I have a 2004 CR-V EX with 15" alloys (and the cursed Bridgestone tires) and I'm looking for some "answers" concerning CR-V wheels. I've always stayed away from "after market" wheels because they usually have offsets and widths that are quite different than stock wheels which unfortunately result in clearance problems. With that in mind (and knowing I will soon purchase new tires) I just purchased four new 16 x 6 1/2" genuine O.E.M. Honda Alloy Wheels (Dealer take-offs from a brand new 2005 CR-V). These 16" wheels have a 50mm offset, the same offset as the (2004) 15" wheels, but besides the 1" bigger diameter they are 1/2" wider. Obviously this 1/2" width is divided equally making the '05 wheel 1/4" wider toward the inside of the vehicle as well as 1/4" wider toward outside. I am assuming (and hoping) that the '05 suspension is exactly the same as the '04 so no clearance problems will arise. Now, let's complicate this a bit.... I also have five brand new (absolutely gorgeous) 5-spoke Acura alloys (also Dealer take-offs from a brand new '03 TL) that I have been saving for a couple of years now. They are 16" x 6 1/2" BUT.... they have a 55mm offset. In theory these will bolt up to my CR-V but are 5mm (about .19") more offset towards the "inside" of the CR-V. Here in Florida, I have seen some pretty wild tire/wheel combinations on CR-V's (new and old) but have never inspected any "up close" or spoken with their owners about suspension mods and/or clearance problems. Has anyone tried a 16" X 6 1/2" wheel with a 55mm offset on a CR-V (2004 w/stock suspension) yet ????
I know I shouldn't have a wandering eye, but before I bought the CRV 4 months ago, I was shopping for a 7 passenger (but couldn't see paying for a Highlander or Pilot).
Today I saw a shiny new Ford Freestyle SEL, pewter gray with leather interior, newly washed, perhaps newly off the lot.
It looked very sharp. The roominess in the back is not that much more than the CRV (maybe the same), but it is very nicely laid out.
Any CRV owners drive one? Varmint...found the time yet?
Looks like a sharp car. No regrets, though: I would have applied the "no car within its first two model years from Ford" rule.
Haven't driven the Ford Freestyle yet, but definitely agree with you on the "no buy first two year of a new model" rule !! My Wife and I are very lucky to have the "best of both worlds".... that is, we own an Acura MDX Touring/Navi with all it's bells, whistles, leather, power, etc. -and- a Honda CR-V EX (cloth seats, NO NAVI)!! The CR-V is great for those "gas guzzling" commutes, running ever so efficiently on just regular gasoline. On the other hand, the comfort of the MDX, as well it's NAVI that has taken us "home" many a time we were lost in the backwoods of Florida, makes up for the extra cost of having to buy premium only fuel. After owning SUV's for a couple of years now, I wonder if I'll ever go back to something like an Acura TL or Honda Accord ??
I replaced the tires on my 2000 CR-V with Goodridge "Precepts" which is a high milage tire sold by Discount Tire. I hated the original Duelers by Bridgestone and was eager to get rid of them. I'm about ready to put Precepts on my 2004 CR-V but decided to try "siping" the Duelers first to see if that helps. I don't think it makes much difference but will give it a longer try on wet roads. I liked the Precepts a lot. They were quieter, softer ride, better traction and all that one wants in a tire. My two cents. George
I don't want to offend anyone but to me the Freestyle looks like a completely pointless vehicle.
My wife and I looked at it when we were shopping for small SUVs (we eventually bought the CRV).
It has less cargo room than most small SUVs. Looks clunkier (in my humble opinion). This is it's first model year (good chance of "teething problems") yet it's considerably more expensive than vehicles the like Escape/Tribute, CRV, Santa Fe, Tuscon, Rav4 etc.
I guess I'm curious why exactly anyone would want one?
There's a lot of buzz about the Freestyle. I think some people are downsizing from bigger SUVs and look favorably at it, and others like the (supposed) Volvo influences. Volvo owners get a bit miffed when the Ford salespeople say the Freestyle has the same platform.
So, we're looking at a new offset about 11mm from stock? Can't say I know anyone that has gone that far. Doesn't mean it isn't possible. Just means I can't recommend it.
I should also note that I have little interest in that sort of thing myself, so I could have missed a post proving it can be done.
The Freestyle is essentially a larger Outback. Not a bad idea. Although I agree that the interior isn't all that much bigger than the larger cute utes, the car-like driving position and stability is a draw for some people.
I've poked around in one at a local auto show. The first thing that grabbed my attention was the Rubbermaid dash. It seemed put together well enough, but the cockpit in that particular trim was covered in semi-soft plastic that had an almost tacky/sticky texture. Something like the grips on a set of plumbing pliers. Probably quite durable, but when it covers every surface, it's just too much. The light grey color was also a bit oppressive.
Beyond that, the front seats were pretty comfortable. I don't recall how the rear cushions felt, but it had decent room. The third row is strictly for kids, but that's to be expected. Unlike the Pacifica, your third row passengers are allowed to keep their head on their shoulders, rather than stashed under a seat.
Cargo space isn't bad. It's about average. The styling is bland, though. Might've been fresh 5 years ago when the Escape was released, but now it makes the Pilot look exciting. Still, I wouldn't mind taking one for a spin.
Saw a Maroon Freestyle limited at the Stop and Shop today...also very shiny. Either proud owners or they are selling fast...
Sentry in Medford had one hugely discounted in today's Herald....but they once told me consumer reports was owned by the Japanese!
Ooops...I have a brand new CRV...better stop. Plus, my daughter says I am going to get arrested for the way I wander around parking lots peering in other people's cars.
Hi to all, I want to buy a used CV-R SUV (2003 Model) with automatic transmission. I tried it yesterday and I overall found it very good. The only thing is that when I stoped uphill and released the brake to start again the car went back until I pushed the "accellerator" again. Is this right? In Europe we usually drive car with manual transmission and some years ago I try a automatic one and it didn't went back up-hill. Is this a problem of the car ? Another question: I eared that when I drive more than 30Km/h - 20mph)the 4WD will be no more "active" How about drive on the highways in snow (60-80 km/h), I will drive only 2WD ?
Thanks for your help and sorry for my poor english
I eared that when I drive more than 30Km/h - 20mph)the 4WD will be no more "active" How about drive on the highways in snow (60-80 km/h), I will drive only 2WD ?
This is not true. The RT4WD will work at all speeds and in reverse.
I found no change in the gas milage. They definitely were a softer ride and if you don't want that, don't consider them. My son, in a heavy snow area in Michigan put winter Nokian snow tires on his CR-V for winter use. He says they are great but changes back to regular tires in the warm weather. I don't want to go through all that so I chose the Precepts which were much better all around tires than the Duelers. I will put Precepts on my 2004 when due. I liked them.
I just purchased BF Goodrich Traction T/A H rated all seasons. They are high performance for a very fair price. Several web sites rate this tire very highly.Apparently police forces are buying them as well because of the excellent all around performance.The reviews at tire rack on this tire are glowing.Food for thought.
I would not get rims with that offset, it's moving in the wrong direction. That narrows the track and could adversely affect vehicle stability. I'd get the CR-V take-offs instead.
I checked at the NY show, the tires are indeed taller, 215/65R16 rather than the old 205/70R15. Ground clearance should indeed be up from the old 8.1" specs.
Freestyle is roomy for the price, but they seem awfully bland. It is cleverly packaged, and the Haldex AWD system is proven (by Volvo). I'd wait for the bigger Duratec engine, though. Reliability and resale would be my concerns.
I just had a set of Michelin X-Radial tires installed on my 04 CRV. These are available thru BJ's and probably COSCO here in the Northeast. I don't think you can get them at a tire store or from Michelin direct per their web site. The X-Radial is not one of their newer designes but a tried and true performer. Anyway, I think I saw a previous poster mention them last year, good tires supposed to go 80K miles. I opted for the 215-70-15 size one step larger that the originals. 1/2 inch wider and just less than a 1/2 inch taller. $100 each installed with free lifetime rotation, balancing, and road haz warranty. I have always bought from the Tire Rack in the past 10 yrs so this is new for me. The convience of one stop shopping made it easy. I know I could have gone with some BGF's, Goodyears or highly rated Kumhos and saved $20 per tire but Michelins are generally a good bet. Ride is real nice with reduced road noise for sure. PS, I run real Hankook snows mounted on separate rims for the winter.
I'm having a problem when driving on the highway. It doesn't pull, but needs constant steering corrections due to the car wandering. Do you think this is related to the Dueler tires. The alignment has been checked, and is in spec.
I have been considering a CRV and have read about the PTTR issue. I then test drove one to check for myself. I concluded that there is something going on that is not quite right. It is pretty much as rocket2 described, a need for constant correction due to the car wondering (to the right). Driving the same route again with my Passat, I did not have this problem.
Needless to say I am no longer considering buying a CRV.
For what it's worth, I just took delivery of a 2005 CRV SE, and there is no evidence of PTTR. It tracks straight as an arrow around town and at highway speeds. ian18, our other car is a Passat too, BTW. If you are used to the handling of VW's, a Honda is a different experience...but it sure shouldn't PTTR!
On another note, I just upgraded to this 05 from a 98 EX that had 132k flawless miles on it. The difference in the ride is amazing. It's like going from a soap box derby car to a Lexus. Well, okay, maybe that's a bit of an exaggeration, but these new CR-V's are very, very nice. Looked at a lot of different vehicles, but I kept coming back to the Honda due to reliability, price, resale, and gas mileage. I really wanted a small truck (looked at the Ridgelines), but with gas prices apparently headed for the sky I decided to get a CR-V, put a hitch on it, and pick up a small utility trailer for those few times a year when I need to haul something big.
Congrats scooter4. A well thought-out purchase. I'm sure this new 'V will perform as well as your previous. Enjoy all the new bells and whistles you've got now.
I have read that the 2006 CR-V will be made in the US. This means starting up a new production line and possible problems with the initial production. I have been debating (with myself) as to getting a 2005 or waiting for a 2006. I'm not in any rush. Anyone have any comments on this?
I have no idea whether it's accurate or not, but I found the following:
Honda to build CR-V in Ohio by Associated Press posted December 20, 2004
Honda's CR-V sport utility vehicle will be made for the first time in the United States at one of two Ohio plants, the production sites of five other Honda vehicles.
Honda of America Manufacturing Inc. announced Monday it wanted to move production of the CR-V for the U.S. market from the United Kingdom closer to SUV buyers who mostly live in the United States.
Honda is not the only auto manufacturer bringing more production to the United States. Swedish truck maker Volvo AB had already announced that it will bring assembly of its truck engines to Hagerstown, Md., and said Monday it may move more production to the United States if the dollar keeps weakening.
CR-V production will begin in 2006 at one of two plants northwest of Columbus, in Marysville or nearby East Liberty.
Japan will continue making the CR-V for the U.S. market, but the two plants in the United Kingdom will make CR-Vs, including a new diesel-fueled product, for the European market, said Yuzuru Matsuno, Honda of America spokesman in the company's Detroit offices.
"Bringing production closer to sales allows better matching of the two and is more efficient for the company and the customer," Matsuno said.
I have every confidence in Honda's ability to make cars in the US to their high standards. But lets face it, starting a new production line maybe with some new suppliers could lead to initial problems - regardless of the quality of the manufacturer. I am an engineer and know how difficult it is to do something like that. I am surprised they would do this since this is the last year before a major overhaul of the CR-V according to what is being said.
But lets face it, starting a new production line maybe with some new suppliers could lead to initial problems - regardless of the quality of the manufacturer.
What you may be neglecting is that Honda works with a limited number of suppliers who have plants all over the world near Honda plants. They have consistant quality systems in place that should eliminate any start up issues. Other than hiring and training people, they can pretty much pick up the manufacturing process and move it anywhere in the world.
own a 98 CRV EX and a 2003 Passat GLS Wagon. 90k on the V but still going strong, suggested to my wife to buy a new V, no way , she says the 98 has a long way to go still, oh well! Wonder how many other V owners have Passats?
p.s. We have a 2003 Miata also.......its a great car also!
"What you may be neglecting is that Honda works with a limited number of suppliers who have plants all over the world near Honda plants. They have consistant quality systems in place that should eliminate any start up issues."
And would that be the same kind of consistent quality system responsible for the two suppliers of factory-installed oil filters blamed for the CR-V fires?
I hate to start this debate all over but the filters are not the issue with the fires. I have an '04 V and NOW change my won oil because of the fire issue. It is easy to see what the problem is. First, there is a strong possibility that the gasket will stick to the block and causes a double gasket seal. Secondly, it is impossible to remove the filter without oil running all over and eventually finding it's way to the hot exhaust system.. I made an aluminum trough that fits up under the filter and directs the flow of oil when changing. It has eliminated the chance of fires as long as one makes sure the original gasket comes off with the filter. All the problems are with the person that changes the filter and with a horrible design of filter placement by HONDA. Even a fool can see what the problem is IF they change the oil themselves. That shows the mentality of Honda who "can't figure out what the problem is". It called "liability". FYI
I agree that the fires are a problem caused by not removing the old filter's gasket. Who's liable for that? I don't think it's Honda. My '99 CR-V is a pain to change filters on as well, but not more than 5 minutes of work. Much easier than some other vehicles. This issue is the brain-dead oil changer who removes the old filter, and doesn't wipe off the machined flange on the engine block. If they did, they would feel the old gasket sticking, remove it, and proceed the install the new filter. And there would be NO FIRES AT ALL. Sure, the mounting of the oil filter above the exhaust system isn't the greatest idea, but Honda isn't the only manufacturer to do that, either. And lots of cars catch on fire. One happened right outside my home 2 years ago - a parked Jeep Cherokee went off like a Roman candle.
Like georgew1, I change my own oil - done it for years, ever since I started hearing about the horror stories of Iffy Lube leaving off drain plugs, putting brake fluid in the power steering reservoir, etc. Minimum wage / first job hirelings are not going to touch any vehicle of mine, period. But if I screw up, it's my butt. If they screw up, it's still my butt. But it ain't Honda's fault that people can't seem to manage removing the old gasket while changing the oil. This isn't the first time this has happened to anyone - my neighbor had her Toyota Camry spew oil because of a double-gasket. Let's put the blame where it belongs, and stop trying to have manufacturers have to redesign everything to be idiot-proof.
This is starting to go the way of the Audi Unintended Acceleration fiasco. That proved to be Unintended, all right. But those folks were still hitting the accelerator, and not the brake. Check it out for yourselves on that one.
You missed my point. Honda is responsible for seeing that their technicians know how to properly work on their cars. I too have always changed my own oil and also had a 2000 V which was a snap to change oil on compared to the 2004. If you haven't tried it, perhaps you should. Honda obviously didn't put their engineering skills into the 2004 design when it comes to removing the oil filter. I'm in complete agreement that the auto manufacturer can't be responsible for stupidity of the owners but they should be responsible enough to at least own up to any real problem. My point is, they took a year to admit to what any sensible backyard mechanic could have seen in a minute. They are obviously more concerned about their liability than the customers that bought their cars. Look how they have treated their customers on transmissions failures on the Accords. I have been a satisfied customer of Honda's since 1984. I have had 10 Honda vehicles and have been satisfied with all of them. I own two now but they are not forthcoming when it comes to recalls or problems unless they are backed to the wall. If you don't believe me look at http://www.autofan.com/forum/asp and see how the Accord Transmission problems have been handled by Honda and then tell me how much "heart" they have when it comes to their failures and their customers.
Everyone can argue about where the liability lies with respect to the engine fires until they are blue in the face. Just because there may be a way to change the oil filters without a resultant fire does not mean that Honda is not liable for the faulty design placement and materials used if a fire occurs. Very few problems in life can be attributed to one single factor. It appears that NHTSA determined that there is JOINT LIABILITY when it stated in its report "ODI'S ANALYSIS FOUND THAT SEAL ADHESION, IN CONJUNCTION WITH TECHNICIAN ERROR AND EXHAUST COMPONENT LOCATION, RESULTED IN A HIGH RATE OF SUBJECT VEHICLE OIL FILTER FIRES COMPARED TO EARLIER MODELS AND PEERS. VEHICLES THAT HAVE NOT HAD THE OE FILTER DISTURBED ARE NOT AT RISK.
It appears to me that the Honda Manufacturer and Honda technicians that are replacing the oil filters are not mutually exclusive entities. My understanding is that the dealers profit from the Honda Manufacturer and vice versa. This makes both parties liable for any damages caused by the design and subsequent replacement of oil filters. If the Honda Manufacturer does not believe that Honda technicians are capable of a simple oil change, they should not recommend that their vehicles be taken to 'authorized Honda technicians' when they print the Owner's Manual. Honda is liable on two levels...faulty design and improperly trained technicians. Steve
It is difficult for me not to mention facts as determined by the Federal Government especially in light of you and Honda's persistent denial. As soon as Honda takes responsibility for problems that they deny (until forced to address), you will have a valid argument. Until then, your comments shed no light on helping out the people on this Board. You are entitled to your opinion. However, attempting to protect Honda in light of overwhelming evidence of their attempts to keep the problems out of the pubic forums does no service for the general public. If it were not for attorneys, the unsafe vehicle conditions that Honda and you characterize as minuscule would never be addressed. I am sure attorneys are Honda's nightmare. Life for Honda would be alot easier if they were able to just walk all over those persons without an advocate on their side. Sadly, it is because of Honda's approach to vehicle problems that the general public needs to hire attorneys. Everybody makes money except the unfortunate people that bought the faulty Honda vehicle. That does not seem fair to me. Steve
Comments
That's pretty good, though.
What it lacks are skid plates, so the catch is if you do get snagged on something you could damage the underbody.
With the right tires and driving carefully you ought to do just fine.
-juice
Uh, Uh, Uh, OK, ya got me. It just FEELS like 9 inches...
What size are the new tires?
I swapped tires on my Forester and got a bigger lift than I had estimated using tire size calculations.
It was really funny, I mounted tires on one side first, then put a level to see how much higher that side was. It was about 3/4" when I measured the wheel wells!
Original was 205/70R15, I went to 225/60R16. Using this tool:
http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html
The radius should only have grown by 0.2". It was more like 0.7" when I measured the floor to the top of the wheel wells.
Why? Manufacturer variance on tire size? Perhaps the 60 series tires have less deflection? Tire pressures were the same.
I took photos, you can visibly see one side higher than the other. I'll see if I can dig them up and share.
Any how, point is I bet the CR-V has more than 8.1" now, so you might be right after all.
-juice
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=4291908527&idx=29
This shows the new tire next to the old one. You have to remember the old tire is mounted so the difference it exaggerated, but still, the new tire is taller and deflects less.
Someone crawl under their 2005 CR-V and measure the distance from the ground to the rear differential. I bet it's more than 8.1".
-juice
I've got great winter tires Toyo Observe Plus, they really rip through the winter snow. 6000km and no probs so far.
I am now looking for good Summer tires, for dry/wet/and occasional unpaved roads. Checked out Tirerack but they actually suggest Bridgestones, which I cannot believe. Don't trust them. Too many bad reviewer ratings. Another suggestion was the GoodYear Comfort tread. Does anybody have a suggestion?
Has anyone tried a 16" X 6 1/2" wheel with a 55mm offset on a CR-V (2004 w/stock suspension) yet ????
Today I saw a shiny new Ford Freestyle SEL, pewter gray with leather interior, newly washed, perhaps newly off the lot.
It looked very sharp. The roominess in the back is not that much more than the CRV (maybe the same), but it is very nicely laid out.
Any CRV owners drive one? Varmint...found the time yet?
Looks like a sharp car. No regrets, though: I would have applied the "no car within its first two model years from Ford" rule.
Bob
My Wife and I are very lucky to have the "best of both worlds".... that is, we own an Acura MDX Touring/Navi with all it's bells, whistles, leather, power, etc. -and- a Honda CR-V EX (cloth seats, NO NAVI)!! The CR-V is great for those "gas guzzling" commutes, running ever so efficiently on just regular gasoline. On the other hand, the comfort of the MDX, as well it's NAVI that has taken us "home" many a time we were lost in the backwoods of Florida, makes up for the extra cost of having to buy premium only fuel. After owning SUV's for a couple of years now, I wonder if I'll ever go back to something like an Acura TL or Honda Accord ??
Wife and I are leaning towards the CR-V...but that Freestyle looked awfully good on the Ford dealer's lot the other day when we were testing Escapes.
Price tag, and new model, puts us off. Seems like a good idea.
Maybe there's something in the Ford forums...
George
My wife and I looked at it when we were shopping for small SUVs (we eventually bought the CRV).
It has less cargo room than most small SUVs. Looks clunkier (in my humble opinion). This is it's first model year (good chance of "teething problems") yet it's considerably more expensive than vehicles the like Escape/Tribute, CRV, Santa Fe, Tuscon, Rav4 etc.
I guess I'm curious why exactly anyone would want one?
Ford Freestyle
Steve, Host
I should also note that I have little interest in that sort of thing myself, so I could have missed a post proving it can be done.
The Freestyle is essentially a larger Outback. Not a bad idea. Although I agree that the interior isn't all that much bigger than the larger cute utes, the car-like driving position and stability is a draw for some people.
I've poked around in one at a local auto show. The first thing that grabbed my attention was the Rubbermaid dash. It seemed put together well enough, but the cockpit in that particular trim was covered in semi-soft plastic that had an almost tacky/sticky texture. Something like the grips on a set of plumbing pliers. Probably quite durable, but when it covers every surface, it's just too much. The light grey color was also a bit oppressive.
Beyond that, the front seats were pretty comfortable. I don't recall how the rear cushions felt, but it had decent room. The third row is strictly for kids, but that's to be expected. Unlike the Pacifica, your third row passengers are allowed to keep their head on their shoulders, rather than stashed under a seat.
Cargo space isn't bad. It's about average. The styling is bland, though. Might've been fresh 5 years ago when the Escape was released, but now it makes the Pilot look exciting. Still, I wouldn't mind taking one for a spin.
Sentry in Medford had one hugely discounted in today's Herald....but they once told me consumer reports was owned by the Japanese!
Ooops...I have a brand new CRV...better stop. Plus, my daughter says I am going to get arrested for the way I wander around parking lots peering in other people's cars.
Bob
I want to buy a used CV-R SUV (2003 Model) with automatic transmission. I tried it yesterday and I overall found it very good. The only thing is that when I stoped uphill and released the brake to start again the car went back until I pushed the "accellerator" again. Is this right? In Europe we usually drive car with manual transmission and some years ago I try a automatic one and it didn't went back up-hill. Is this a problem of the car ?
Another question:
I eared that when I drive more than 30Km/h - 20mph)the 4WD will be no more "active" How about drive on the highways in snow (60-80 km/h), I will drive only 2WD ?
Thanks for your help and sorry for my poor english
Best Regards
Gian Carlo
This is not true. The RT4WD will work at all speeds and in reverse.
ALL cars will do this except for some Subarus and Studebakers that had a "hill holder".
Just keep your foot on the brake!
Thanks for the info.
I checked at the NY show, the tires are indeed taller, 215/65R16 rather than the old 205/70R15. Ground clearance should indeed be up from the old 8.1" specs.
Freestyle is roomy for the price, but they seem awfully bland. It is cleverly packaged, and the Haldex AWD system is proven (by Volvo). I'd wait for the bigger Duratec engine, though. Reliability and resale would be my concerns.
-juice
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
-juice
Needless to say I am no longer considering buying a CRV.
On another note, I just upgraded to this 05 from a 98 EX that had 132k flawless miles on it. The difference in the ride is amazing. It's like going from a soap box derby car to a Lexus. Well, okay, maybe that's a bit of an exaggeration, but these new CR-V's are very, very nice. Looked at a lot of different vehicles, but I kept coming back to the Honda due to reliability, price, resale, and gas mileage. I really wanted a small truck (looked at the Ridgelines), but with gas prices apparently headed for the sky I decided to get a CR-V, put a hitch on it, and pick up a small utility trailer for those few times a year when I need to haul something big.
Since Honda hasn't made any official announcements concerning the 2006 CR-V what you've read online is rumors, speculation, or wishful thinking.
JM2C
Honda has been building cars in the US since the mid eighties and I doubt very much if there would be any initial problems.
Honda to build CR-V in Ohio
by Associated Press posted December 20, 2004
Honda's CR-V sport utility vehicle will be made for the first time in the United States at one of two Ohio plants, the production sites of five other Honda vehicles.
Honda of America Manufacturing Inc. announced Monday it wanted to move production of the CR-V for the U.S. market from the United Kingdom closer to SUV buyers who mostly live in the United States.
Honda is not the only auto manufacturer bringing more production to the United States. Swedish truck maker Volvo AB had already announced that it will bring assembly of its truck engines to Hagerstown, Md., and said Monday it may move more production to the United States if the dollar keeps weakening.
CR-V production will begin in 2006 at one of two plants northwest of Columbus, in Marysville or nearby East Liberty.
Japan will continue making the CR-V for the U.S. market, but the two plants in the United Kingdom will make CR-Vs, including a new diesel-fueled product, for the European market, said Yuzuru Matsuno, Honda of America spokesman in the company's Detroit offices.
"Bringing production closer to sales allows better matching of the two and is more efficient for the company and the customer," Matsuno said.
http://autonet.ca/Facilities/story.cfm?story=/Facilities/2004/12/20/791353.html
What you may be neglecting is that Honda works with a limited number of suppliers who have plants all over the world near Honda plants. They have consistant quality systems in place that should eliminate any start up issues. Other than hiring and training people, they can pretty much pick up the manufacturing process and move it anywhere in the world.
p.s. We have a 2003 Miata also.......its a great car also!
Production beginning in '06... That tells me it will be the '07 model.. Which may even be a new design...
regards,
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
And would that be the same kind of consistent quality system responsible for the two suppliers of factory-installed oil filters blamed for the CR-V fires?
Like georgew1, I change my own oil - done it for years, ever since I started hearing about the horror stories of Iffy Lube leaving off drain plugs, putting brake fluid in the power steering reservoir, etc. Minimum wage / first job hirelings are not going to touch any vehicle of mine, period. But if I screw up, it's my butt. If they screw up, it's still my butt. But it ain't Honda's fault that people can't seem to manage removing the old gasket while changing the oil. This isn't the first time this has happened to anyone - my neighbor had her Toyota Camry spew oil because of a double-gasket. Let's put the blame where it belongs, and stop trying to have manufacturers have to redesign everything to be idiot-proof.
This is starting to go the way of the Audi Unintended Acceleration fiasco. That proved to be Unintended, all right. But those folks were still hitting the accelerator, and not the brake. Check it out for yourselves on that one.
It appears to me that the Honda Manufacturer and Honda technicians that are replacing the oil filters are not mutually exclusive entities. My understanding is that the dealers profit from the Honda Manufacturer and vice versa. This makes both parties liable for any damages caused by the design and subsequent replacement of oil filters. If the Honda Manufacturer does not believe that Honda technicians are capable of a simple oil change, they should not recommend that their vehicles be taken to 'authorized Honda technicians' when they print the Owner's Manual. Honda is liable on two levels...faulty design and improperly trained technicians. Steve
Once in awhile, I'll run into someone who swears the Japan cars are somehow "better". I think it's a placebo effect on their part.
I'll admit, after owning a couple of British cars, I had a bit of concern but they are exactly the same.
It is difficult for me not to mention facts as determined by the Federal Government especially in light of you and Honda's persistent denial. As soon as Honda takes responsibility for problems that they deny (until forced to address), you will have a valid argument. Until then, your comments shed no light on helping out the people on this Board. You are entitled to your opinion. However, attempting to protect Honda in light of overwhelming evidence of their attempts to keep the problems out of the pubic forums does no service for the general public. If it were not for attorneys, the unsafe vehicle conditions that Honda and you characterize as minuscule would never be addressed. I am sure attorneys are Honda's nightmare. Life for Honda would be alot easier if they were able to just walk all over those persons without an advocate on their side. Sadly, it is because of Honda's approach to vehicle problems that the general public needs to hire attorneys. Everybody makes money except the unfortunate people that bought the faulty Honda vehicle. That does not seem fair to me. Steve