Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

2001 - 2006 Honda CR-Vs



  • nornenorne Posts: 136
    I think its whatever little changes honda made to MY 2003-04 that is the root of the problem. I have 2002 model honda recommends changing oil at 10k for normal and 5k for severe driving.
  • raydahsraydahs Posts: 449
    Interesting stuff, when I was considering the CR-V 3 months ago, the salesperson told me that the CR-V was next in line. Does the CR-V share the Accord engine? If so, it would fit in easily...correct? - - - _id=8505
  • silver_bulletsilver_bullet Posts: 1,339
    Current BMWs utilize a top mounted metal oil filtration cannister that incorporates an O-ringed threaded cover. When you remove the cover, you extract a filter "insert" that is designed to be crushed to extract all the waste oil for recycling. You can change the insert from the top and barely get your hands dirty... no cheap spin-on filters here! However, I agree that the 15K oil change intervals seem overly optimistic, even with this elaborate filter system and the factory fill of synthetic oil.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I'm sure the gasket is just rubber, but there are many grades of the stuff. 10k miles is long-ish but not extreme by any means.

    crvicia: wow, glad you're OK! How did it happen? Were you in the car, driving?

    Definitely share the info with the NHTSA. The more data they have the better.

  • kizhekizhe Posts: 242
    My Volvo S-70 GLT got a similar oil/filter system - bottom mounted plastic oil filtration canister that incorporates an O-ringed threaded cover. When you remove the cover, you extract a filter "insert" and replace it to the new one.
    There is twice as much oil in Volvo engine - 8 Q, recommended oil change interval - 7.5K .
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    "OK, let's say that SOME of the fires can be traced to poor quality gasket on the filter as the two posters have said that the dealers have said."

    Am I missing something? I thought we had one poster (quoting a service Tech) who blamed gasket quality. Where has this been repeated? (Seriously, I'm trying to learn as much about this as anyone.)

    I know that Cybernut questioned the Service Manager and got this explanation.

    "He said no, that it was a combination of things: the original filter installed in the factory is installed very tightly; the gasket may or may not be properly lubricated; and the heat near the oil filter can “bake” the gasket, making it stick more than usual."

    But that list doesn't include a poor quality gasket. It lays the blame on installation, lubrication, and heat, but there's no mention of quality.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    The CR-V uses a 2.4L engine that is similar to the four cylinder used in the Accord. However, the Accord hybrid uses an electric motor hooked up to the 3.0 V6, not the four banger. That block will not fit into the CR-V's engine compartment.
  • raydahsraydahs Posts: 449
    Yep I spoke too soon, this morning a friend brought in the latest Automobile magazine and it showed the Accord Hybrid V6. As you stated, no way it will fit. I wonder if they're going after the Highlander and put it in the Pilot or take the one in the Civic and put it in the CR-V to go against the Escape. Either way it should be a winner.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    There are a couple of possibilities. It sounds strange to think this way, but Honda now has four SUVs (crossovers) in their line-up. The Element, CR-V, Pilot, and MDX are all potential for a hybrid.

    Furthermore, there are plans to introduce a vehicle named RDX to the Acura line-up. This is supposed to be smaller than the MDX and possibly CR-V based. It has been shown as a concept car with a hybrid drivetrain.

    And those are just the SUVs. Honda could also put the hybrid in the Odyssey. The Ody is already offering the variable cylinder technology that is part of what makes the hybrid Accord work.
  • sabrina9sabrina9 Posts: 148
    First, I think we need to separate the fires. Some were caused by a dbl gasket. Arguably that is the tech, even though Steve the Host thought the mfr had some responsibility.

    I am talking about the others, which is where I refer to post 13339 Kizhe talking to the service manager about the new filters. He (SM) seemed to know alot about the fires and at least said that the gaskets were weak. My first Q is why would he say that unless he had some reason, especially where he is selling Honda parts. Second, don't you think it is a little strange that Honda would change the filters all of a sudden when they just changed them a few months ago?

    Granted, it is only one dealer. Maybe I'll go buy a filter and ask the same Q Kizhe asked.
    I guess the only way to solve this is to see the circular.
  • crviciacrvicia Posts: 4
    I was driving home from work and I noticed a slight smell,I originally remember thinking it was some "oil burning car" near me. Within a half a block my Crv was filled with smoke. I immediately pulled over. Two witnesses saw flames underneath my car. I didn't actually see the fire but I did see all of the oil pour onto the pavement. I immediately thought that the dealership messed up with my oil change. It had been 3 days, but I had only driven about 20 miles since I had left the shop. The dealership is replacing my "fire damaged" crv with a brand new one. The dealership has been WONDERFUL under the circumstances. But I am sure I will want to be standing by the tech who changes my next oil filter. I was so glad that my husband had not done my first oil change. I have a feeling we would have been SOL. I cant believe that Honda isn't notifying owners about this problem. Just think of all the DIY oil changers!

    In the end, I am lucky. I could have been hurt or the fire could have been much worse. I just hope it doesn't become a fatal issue for someone else.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    "Arguably that is the tech, even though Steve the Host thought the mfr had some responsibility."

    I was unaware that Steve the Host was an expert in automotive safety or engineering. Which automotive super powers do I get for being the CR-V Czar? =)

    Actually, it was post # 13338 where Kizhe mentioned another SM's opinion. That's the one I was missing. Thanks.

    My CR-V is doing in for major surgery (belt replacement) later this week. I will ask if they (independent mechanics) also have a theory about the gaskets. Perhaps someone can keep track of how many we are able to collect. Yes?
  • steverstever Posts: 52,683
    I think Honda bears more responsibility than the techs at this point, from what I've read, the NHTSA notwithstanding.

    You know that if someone is injured in a car fire, Honda is going be sued as well as the dealer. And it won't surprise me if a jury holds Honda responsible.

    Steve, Host
  • sabrina9sabrina9 Posts: 148
    I had an interesting conversation with NHTSA about the O-ring issues that the SM had brought up. (I was looking for a copy of the circular mentioned). Unless I misunderstood him, he said that even if there was indeed a "problem" with the o-ring (premature wearing, etc.), NHTSA would not necessarily get involved and that things like filters were generally out of the jurisdiction of NHTSA.

    It actually makes sense to me what he said, since I can't recall NHTSA ever forcing a recall of things like windshield wipers (analogous situation), filters, etc.

    Is this true?
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    Well, I know that the NHTSA does get involved with mechanical failures of the sort. I think it was the Ford Escape that was recalled for having a problem that led to wiper failure... which inhibits visibility, which could cause an accident, which makes it a problem for the NHTSA. But that was a mechanical failure, not a degradation of the wiper blade.

    It could be that the NHTSA does not deal with parts that are featured on the open market. It's a good question.
  • I tossed the stock B-Stone Duelers at 14K miles,(fronts were near bald), and went to aftermkt wheels,(7.5x16), and Goodyear Eagle GTs in 225/60-16.
    A not dirt cheap deal, but the handling, braking dist. and overall "feel" is remarkably better. (As should be the new set's longevity, as the BStones wear like a autocross tire, w/out the stick,lol!)

    As for your noise question: it is reduced perceptibly by this wheel/tire combo, as other brands, (in orig size,even), should do better than oem. The noise, however, is not gone or dramaticaly reduced. I suspect there is v.little sound deadening in the area above wheel wells; thus, the considerable "road noise", which is really a function of tire tread on road, wheel rotation, air pressure damned up in w.wells and airflow along the sides of the vehicle. While the zealots here are enraptured of their cars, it is, imo, a utilitarian/3rd world effort in its current state,w/jes' a few touches of normal Honda quality. Thus, the noiser than hoped for, ride conditions.

    Good for around town,etc...not my fave for long trips and gas mpg is really so-so. My 2Cts.
    PS: Not sure the Vue would be on my short list,either, but diff'n strokes.
  • Thank you for your 2 cents. I am sure the statement you made "While the zealots here are enraptured of their cars" should go over real well here...LOL. Wait till CZAR Varmint reads that, you might regret it. All movements that have been hijacked by Zealots tend to be very intolerant of dissent.

    Having said that, the Goodyear Eagles are nice tires. I had them on my car a couple back and it made the vehicle feel like it was riding on rails when it went around corners. I think I will buy my CRV in November when the 2005's are out for awhile. Then I will buy a "touring tire" that is made for comfort and a quiet ride. I think that will get me 1/2 way there in reducing the road noise to reasonable level. I drive for a living so this vehicle will become an over the road war warrior. IT is one of the reasons for buying it. I can put on a boat load of miles and will still be able to recapture a lot of equity when its time to sell.

    You are right about Honda not bothering to put in much sound deadening material in this vehicle. I have never got a good explanation as why since it seems a pretty cheap and simple thing to do.

    If I get desperate, I will do like CZAR Varmint did and have sound deadening material installed. He never quantified how much of a difference it made between before and after. I would be curious as to what percentage it was.

    Thanks again for your 2cents

  • kyfdxkyfdx Posts: 64,880
    When the first generation CR-V came out, it was woefully underpowered.. 127 horsepower.. I always assumed they were doing anything possible to save weight. Now, why they didn't try to improve that once they gave the 2nd generation the big power bump, I'm not sure.


    Prices Paid, Lease Questions, SUVs

  • theracoontheracoon Posts: 666
    When the first generation CR-V came out, it was woefully underpowered.. 127 horsepower.. I always assumed they were doing anything possible to save weight. Now, why they didn't try to improve that once they gave the 2nd generation the big power bump, I'm not sure.

    I thought the US 1997-98 CR-V had 126 HP? In any case, in 1999 Honda increased it to 146 HP (about 16% increase). And of course in 2002 changed the engine to a 160 HP model (a 10% increase). So there wasn't really a "big bump" between the 2001 and 2002 CR-Vs.

    And I doubt the design philosophy of efficieny and minimal weight changed with the redesign. The US CR-V is an entry level SUV and therefore lacks amenities available on more expensive vehicles. Honda offers more refined SUVs for those who require those features: Pilot and MDX.

  • kyfdxkyfdx Posts: 64,880
    This is only my opinion.. (what isn't?).. The jump from '01 to '02 is much more noticeable than the jump from '98-'99. Even though HP numbers went up from '98-'99, the engine size didn't change, and I would guess that the torque numbers didn't jump nearly as much.. However, the new engine in '02, was approx 20% bigger, and I would think the torque numbers jumped by a bigger percentage than the horsepower..

    At least, it sure feels that way to me.. I've driven '99-'01s and while they definitely feel more powerful than my '98, and I recommend them to people that are looking used.. They still feel underpowered. though.. I never have that feeling with the Gen II models.

    You are probably right about 126HP, instead of 127..



    Prices Paid, Lease Questions, SUVs

  • suvtimesuvtime Posts: 58
    It doesn't seem that it's just the CR-V that's a bit too noisy in the Honda line up. Even the Accord and Pilot by some reports could use a bit more sound deadening.

    With V6's in those vehicles they could easily add more sound deadening without worrying about the extra weight.

    Toyota seems to manage to put more sound deadening material even in their entry level SUV's like RAV4 which maybe why its not as fast as the CR-V
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    Sound dampening material weighs quite a bit. Even the stuff they use at the factory. Adding weight reduces fuel economy, handling, and acceleration.

    In smaller cars (like the old CRX, for an extreme example), they say that reducing the vehicle's weight by 6 pounds is like adding 1 horsepower. Going from a stock battery to an aftermarket one adds about 2 hp (more than adding a CAI).

    If you compare the fuel economy of the Honda Element with the CR-V, you can see what adding 100-200 lbs can do to fuel economy.

    Now, vehicles like the RAV4 and Forester are both significantly lighter than the CR-V. Both out-handle the CR-V, and both have higher EPA estimates for fuel economy. But both of them suffer a significant difference in size. The CR-V bests them in passenger and cargo space.

    Now, take a look at those vehicles that come closer to matching the CR-V in terms of size, such as the Escape or VUE. The CR-V is lighter than both by 100-200 lbs, fuel economy is higher in the CR-V, and the CR-V matches them in acceleration with only 160 hp.

    In short, you can't have everything. I agree that the CR-V is a bit noisey, but IMHO its a worthwhile compromise for all the benefits it provides.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    "If I get desperate, I will do like CZAR Varmint did and have sound deadening material installed. He never quantified how much of a difference it made between before and after. I would be curious as to what percentage it was."

    Here's that story. Keep in mind that my CR-V is a 1999 model and very different than the new ones.

    I did the work myself. I installed Dynamat Premium on the floor under the front seats and up the firewall as far as I could go without removing the dash. I also installed it on all four doors.

    This resulted in a modest reduction in road noise. Had I gone to town with the stuff and covered the cargo area and floor all the way back under the rear seats, I would have achieved much better results. I did not do this because A) this stuff adds weight, and B) this stuff is not cheap.

    One side affect of this job was the unexpected joy of hearing my engine. Now that the road noise had been reduced, I could hear the engine clear as day.

    I attempted to resolve this by adding a hoodliner (which is relatively light). The hoodliner is not as effective as the dynamat. I would not bother with it again.

    The end result is that my CR-V is slightly less noisey than others of the same vintage, but it's not any more quiet than other cars on the road.

    Now, if I had a 2nd generation CR-V, things would be much different.

    1. The 2nd gen has a stock hoodliner.
    2. The 2nd gen's engine is much quieter.
    3. Road noise is less pronounced than in the 1st gen.

    So I think that a good layer of dynamat under the floor is all that is needed for the 2nd gen. Just be sure to cover the entire floor for best results.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Interesting how Honda is handling crvicia's case a lot different than Sabrina's. Full new replacement, eh?

    I think the Acura RDX might be the quieter SUV that some think the CR-V plus sound deadening material would be.

  • kyfdxkyfdx Posts: 64,880
    I was under the impression that it was the dealer replacing her car.. which would make sense, if they are blaming it on a faulty oil change job.



    Prices Paid, Lease Questions, SUVs

  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    crvicia: can you clarify? Who footed the tab?

    Of course the dealer might tell her it was them even if Honda did pay for it...

  • kyfdxkyfdx Posts: 64,880
    but, I doubt Honda has paid for any new cars as a result of these fires.....


    Prices Paid, Lease Questions, SUVs

  • gee35coupegee35coupe Posts: 3,475
    But then again they have insurance for stuff like that.
  • hi everyone,

    i havent posted on edmunds for quite a while now but i hope this isnt far off topic. anyways, i went on a road trip recently on my cr-v to vegas.

    I loved the car, 4 ppl on board and their cargo wasnt THAT much of a problem. Most of the time, there was plently of power to go around town. But on the highway where most cars are going 90+ mph, the cr-v started to strain. Going up the mountains just trying to keep up with the traffic at 80+ mph was almost impossible in 4th gear. So i had to drop it down to 3rd and let the little engine spin and do its ivtec thing. :P i had some concerns which i posted as well on the cr-v problems discussion. I hope that all that high rpm driving didnt kill the engine for the long term. but hey, i hit 100 mph on my cr-v :P

    I loaded up the 6 disc changer and loved it. But the road noise was absolutely deafening with the bf goodrich tires with 50k miles on it. yea, i SUFFERED with them for that long. I had to turn up the radio very high just to drown out the road noise. I just cant wait till the tires go and i could get the yoko avid tourings. The wind noise only got bad when it was over 80 mph. high speed stability was ok...up to about 85 mph, it was good. at 100, it was frightening since there were winds that made a sienna swerve.

    The seats were comfortable for the 2 hours that i drove since we stopped every 2 hours. HVAC did well in the 100 degree weather. I only had to set it at the 12 o'clock position. didnt even have to use it past the half way mark. The ride was great, smooth without being floaty. (i call it the honda style smoothness)

    my relatives complemented the innovative dashboard, with the ebrake and the dash shifter.

    Another problem that i also posted on the other discussion was that the car's rpm dropped to the 500's. The whole car started to sputter and shake. Everyone in the car felt it. i was going up an incline that time, but i dont kno if that was causing that problem.

    But i throughly enjoyed driving the cr-v on the road trip. It provided reliable and fun motoring the whole time. I considered purchasing the santa fe but got a honda instead for its reliability. I never looked back again. I apologize for this off topic and long post. Just to make it relevant, i havent had the engine fires. I only took my car to the dealer for its first oil change and the rest of the time, independent shops.
  • forgot to mention this about my trip...i didnt know where else to post it but here it goes...

    i was driving down the strip in vegas and i saw 3 test cars. They were following a white mercedes c class wagon (which unusually had no alloy/aluminum rims) and was followed by a red c class coupe. They were a little shorter than my cr-v and a little smaller in length. The roof line was very smooth, almost past the wheel wells like the prev gen rx300. the cargo window on the side was not connected to the rest of the windows on the door, like the cr-v. it was a 5 door (like a pt cruiser style). It had a small center airbag cover on the steering wheel and rounded instrumentations for the speedometer, etc. The interior was black and modernly styled. Also the hvac vents were rounded, ala pontiac style. the outside was COMPLETELY covered. only the lights werent covered. Indicator lamps on the mirrors on the side, rounded lamps mounted vertically on the back, and arched headlamps. (like popped up from the surface kinda arches) Low ground clearance so it cant be an suv. It had california plates. I couldnt get a pic since the camera was way in the back of the car.I thought that it was a benz but it couldnt be due to the interior styling. Maybe its a pontiac? Any ideas on this? my inside told me that i should have fought to get the camera, took a pic, and sold it to a mag like motor trend. Hm...
Sign In or Register to comment.