CR-V vs Escape

stever · August 2009

Ah, sorry, didn't mean to sound anything other than a bit sarcastic. I just wondered if anyone besides a Nissan fan would ever notice that your user name is also the name of a great engine. Likely not any Ford or Honda fans in here (unless the Ford fan drove a Villager, the Quest twin).

Keep breathing, the dog days of summer will soon be gone. ;-)

vg33e power · August 2009

My apologies for understanding your comment negatively...and yes although a bit low in HP the VG33E engine was an outstanding engine with lots of torque, it was also built like a tank in my opinion. Loved my 2004 Nissan Frontier but it fell victim to the over $4.00 a gallon crisis.

explorerx4 · August 2009

my wife has a black escape with the chrome trim and plastic chrome wheels.
i had my doubts about the plastic chromies, but they are easy to clean, as advertised.

chuckfromli · September 2009

Is anyone actually cross shoping these vehicles now, or are we just talking Odyssey brakes, Nissan motors and lawn motors?

Anybody recently cross shop them?

PS-I had a Craftsman with a Briggs and Stratton, and a Bolens with a Briggs and Stratton. Neither compares to the Honda mower. Pay the extra $100 for a product that will always work properly and last twice as long. It's like buying a Weber grill, Levis jeans or a Polo shirt. They work better, feel better and last longer. And because they last much longer, they are cheaper in the long run.

motoguy128 · September 2009

Nope. the Escape looks like a Mini Ford Explorer...and thats's not a compliment. It' a little ugly box. Sorry. That's the extent of my cross shopping. Also, on the spec sheet, it doesn't have as much interior flexibility as the CR-V. The upgraded pwoertrains are at least a big step forward.

Ultimately I don't expect it to steer or handle like a Honda. But for those that just puch pedals and turn the wheel where they want to go, and don't care, it's probably a perfectly good alternative.

chuckfromli · September 2009

I guess beauty is really in the eye of the beholder, as I prefer the Escapes looks to the CRV. I like the SUV look.

What do you mean by "interior flexibility". I know that the rear window on the Escape can be opened independently of the rear door, something the CRV and RAV4 don't have. This has been useful to me on Pathfinder for carrying long things like mouldings and 2 x 4s from Home Depot, or taking things to the dump. It's just added flexibility.

I am sure it doesn't stop or handle lke a Honda.

stevedebi · September 2009

"Nope. the Escape looks like a Mini Ford Explorer...and thats's not a compliment. It' a little ugly box. Sorry. That's the extent of my cross shopping. Also, on the spec sheet, it doesn't have as much interior flexibility as the CR-V. The upgraded pwoertrains are at least a big step forward. "

I owned a gen2 CR-V, and I liked the car. However, when it came time to buy new, I simply hated the styling of the Gen3, and I like the classic styling of the Escape. That "boxy shape" provides a much more usable interior over the rounded shapes of the other vehicles. And I also like the separate glass window opening instead of a fixed rear window.

But then I am a person who puts functionality over style (although I like the Escape style).

motoguy128 · September 2009

The Escape has less cargo room, less passenger interior volume, significantly less legroom in the rear... despite weighing about the same. The new 2.5L is an improvement, but the revised Honda 2.4L comming in the 2010 model makes even more power.

although some of that cargo volume comes from a deeper cargo area since the rear seat flip forward rather than folding forward creating a flat load floor.

The 4WD 4 cylinder Escape still gets 2mpg city and highway despite having a 6 speed automatic. Ford must use more of a full-time 4WD system whereas Honda, Toyota and Nissan use more of a part time system.

I suppose it is personal preference. I like my CUV's rounded and sleek so long as they don't sacrifice interior room. The CR-V doesn't. But I am biased.

stevedebi · September 2009

"The 4WD 4 cylinder Escape still gets 2mpg city and highway despite having a 6 speed automatic. Ford must use more of a full-time 4WD system whereas Honda, Toyota and Nissan use more of a part time system. "

And my 2008 Escape Hybrid AWD gets 30 MPG in town, about 32 on the road here on LA freeways. An FWD will get 35 in town... although it is more expensive that the CR-V. But there is no high mileage option available on the CR-V.

You are correct about Ford use of AWD; it kicks in to enhance performance and handling even on dry roads. Ford calls it "intelligent", whatever that means.

"I suppose it is personal preference. I like my CUV's rounded and sleek so long as they don't sacrifice interior room. The CR-V doesn't. But I am biased."

It is personal preference (I hate the CR-V Gen3 front end), but I have to disagree with you on the sacrifice of interior room. The Gen3 would have been HUGELY larger inside if they had kept the rear in the "box" configuration. The vehicle is larger in all dimensions outside than the Gen2, but about the same inside.

explorerx4 · September 2009

cr-v may have more room, but the escape is fine for 99%. i am over 6 ft and have sat in the front and rear of the escape for extended periods of time. i do not have any physical space issues.
based on the new epa ratings, with our 04' escape we are averaging 7% over (epa 18, us 19+). the 09 is averaging over 15% above the epa rating (epa 20, us 23 and should go higher as it breaks in).
also, the escape has gotten quiet, which the cr-v has not.

motoguy128 · September 2009

EPA figurs are only meant as a tool to compare 2 vehicles. In "highway" driving, I beat the CR-V's EPA rating by 13%, but in my extreme city driving (average speed of about 15mph), I get 10-15% lower mileage. My '03 Toyota Corolla beat its EPA highway numbers as well, but in my city driving, it was almsot 30% below the EPA rating.

For 2010 the CR-V is gaining 1mpg highway and city, and is expected to be a little quieter as well.

It's clear we both prefer our respective vehciles.

stevedebi · September 2009

"It's clear we both prefer our respective vehciles. "

It is interesting about the interior room. When I shopped the Escape, I had to move the seat FORWARD because I had too much legroom for comfort. I am 6' tall. In the CR-V I did not have as much room, although there was more room in the rear of the CR-V.

But as you said, we prefer our respective vehicles. For me the shape of the Gen3 and that ugly nose were deal killers.

motoguy128 · September 2009

It is interesting about the interior room. When I shopped the Escape, I had to move the seat FORWARD because I had too much legroom for comfort. I am 6' tall. In the CR-V I did not have as much room, although there was more room in the rear of the CR-V.

But as you said, we prefer our respective vehicles. For me the shape of the Gen3 and that ugly nose were deal killers.

The combined frot nand rear legroom numbrs are still higher for the CR-V, so even iff you could move hte front seat 1" further back, it would still have more total legroom. I do wish Honda had mounted it another 1/2" or 1" back. I wouldn't mind 1 more "notch".

Funny, I had the same sentiments about Escape's front end. Well not ugly, jsut rather boring. The explorer styling just seems so tired. It just reminds me of the 1980 and 90's too much. WHich si unfortunalte because I know Ford makes dramatically better vehciles than it did in the 80's and 90's... actually most are now equal or better than the competition... but I don't want anything to remind me of it's ugly past. I actually preferrd the previous genration Escape styling bett.er I wish they would have just modernized it's headlights and grill rather than making it a mini explorer. But I think they wanted to futher seperate it from it's Mazda roots. Which is funny, because the best looking and best designed vehciles Ford has are based on Mazda or joint designs.

The CR-V is a little unusual and awkward looking from some angles, but I love hte side and bakc profiles and styling.

vg33e power · September 2009

I own a 2004 Ford Escape Limited. When my wife and I were shopping for her vehicle we test drove the CR-V as well from 2004. Its clear which SUV won. I also like the looks of the 2005-2007 Escape better then our 2001-2004 generation (front styling for the most part). The 2008 and up Escape is also nice but it "looks" a little bit less rugged and more gussied up bling-bling type of style. The current CR-V also looks very nice all around until you get to the front nose part...what was Honda thinking?? In fact what is Honda thinking in many of their vehicles when it comes to design?? Accord? It once used to be a very nice all around vehicle, perhaps a benchmark for family sedans, but now I beleive it lost by a lot on the styling department, the Accord is just plain ugly IMO. The Element is ugly, except for the SC model, the Pilot front end got slapped with the ugly stick as well. Also, the entire Acura line-up is just butt-ugly to nicely put it. Honda may still have the edge on fit, finish and reliability, but they are loossing ground big time in styling.

sr146260211 · September 2009

I had a choice between a 2007 Accord and the new arrival 2008 Accord a few short years back and preferred the 08 way more then the 07. Looks is of course are subjective and I can care less what others think of a front end looks or what ever, of any car, as long as I like it.

As far as what was Honda thinking with the new style ? I think they are doing just fine. Others, many others for the numbers that buy them over some other brand, think the same way.

vg33e power · September 2009

I guarantee you that "most" of those buying the 2008 and newer Accord are buying them for the following reasons in no particular order:

1. No choice if they want a brand new Accord
2. Reliability reputation
3. Because its a Honda
4. Interior room
5. Comfortableness

I really doubt that the styling is high on their roster, because subjective or not there are many people (including myself) and professional reviews (Edmunds, KBB, Motor Trend, etc.) that think the styling of the current generation (frog eyed) Accords is a step backwards from the last generation instead of an improvement.

explorerx4 · September 2009

actually a lot of the front end styling of the escape (other than the plasti-chrome) has to do with aerodynamics.
look at the front end of a current Tahoe and the hybrid version.

richk6 · September 2009

I don't think Honda is losing ground big time in sales. Styling is subjective and those people who can't get past the G3 CRV front end are missing out in owning a superior class vehicle.

Number one selling SUV in U.S. 3 years running. I guess sensibility is still guiding the buying public.

motoguy128 · September 2009

actually a lot of the front end styling of the escape (other than the plasti-chrome) has to do with aerodynamics.
look at the front end of a current Tahoe and the hybrid version.

Seriously? Making a vehcile more boxy, doesn;t enhance the aerodynamics. Reducing hte frontal area and smoothing surfaces so there are fewer sharp angles that create turbulence does.

Most poeple don't realize that much of the improvement in aerodynamics comes from the underside and rear end, since optimizing the front end will impact impact protection and pedestrian collision requirements that Japan and Europe have.

The Tahoe was just trying it update it's look.s Ford wanted theri Escape to look bigger, more like the Explorer, like a rugged SUV. Honda wanted the CR-V to be unique and look well, like a Honda and more car-like.

Overall, I'd suspect the CR-V has a lower or equal ceofecient of drag as the Escape, but it's larger overall dimension will give it a larger frontal area.

To better understand the relationship, consider a motorcycle... Many 600cc sportbikes with only 130HP at the crank can appreach 160mph. Their coefficients of drag with a rider are actually much worse than most cars, BUT, their frontal area is perhaps 1/2 that of a car.

stevedebi · September 2009

"Seriously? Making a vehcile more boxy, doesn;t enhance the aerodynamics. Reducing hte frontal area and smoothing surfaces so there are fewer sharp angles that create turbulence does. "

Actually, there are means by which once can have a "boxy" rear, and yet the aerodynamics do not suffer, but it doesn't look right for style. I forget the name of the concept, but basically it involves making the air flow such that it generates a sort of roiling motion behind the rear window, and air flows over it.

It can be interesting; for example a pickup truck is more efficient with the rear gate UP than with it down...

explorerx4 · September 2009

concerning aerodynamics, which mentions that the 09 gets 1 mpg better than the 08, due to a reshaping of the front.

page 20 near bottom

motoguy128 · September 2009

concerning aerodynamics, which mentions that the 09 gets 1 mpg better than the 08, due to a reshaping of the front.

I suspect that's more marketing hype. It gains 1mpg in city and highway. City mileage as it's tested would not be largely affected by such a small aerdynamic change. If the increase was only on highway mileage, I'd believe it, but since it's both, I suspect the changes to the compression, cams and fuel injectors made the greatest impact. It's apparanetly slightly more efficient at part throttle from the changes, even though peak torque output has not increased.

I think the modified front end may have helped, but was a smaller factor.

stevedebi · September 2009

"I suspect that's more marketing hype. It gains 1mpg in city and highway. City mileage as it's tested would not be largely affected by such a small aerdynamic change. If the increase was only on highway mileage, I'd believe it, but since it's both, I suspect the changes to the compression, cams and fuel injectors made the greatest impact. It's apparanetly slightly more efficient at part throttle from the changes, even though peak torque output has not increased. "

The city MPG is because of the new 2.5L engine, they were able to use it more efficiently than the old 2.3L, so yes, they did adjust a lot of the internal timings & etc.

The highway mileage, believe it or not, is helped by increasing the width of a very small chin spoiler. In my 2008 it stops short of the edges of the front bumper. In the 2009-2010, it extends further by about 3 inches on each side. Apparently this managed to cut the aerodynamic drag caused by the front tires...

motoguy128 · September 2009

I thought you were talking about the 2010 CR-V in terms of it's mileage going up 1mpg.

Although, don't be fooled on the 2010 CR-V. IT makes 180HP now, but in real world driving, there won't be a noticeable increase because most all the gains were above 5000 RPM. Most of it likely above 6000.

On the Escape. Yes, the 2.5L is a big improvement. The 2.3L was getting dated and underperformed in the standard configuration (not the DI or turbo version) and a weak spot for both Ford and Mazda.

explorerx4 · September 2009

i think the biggest difference is the transmission.
the '09 3.0 is about 20% more powerful, yet delivers better mileage.
it doesn't use direct injection, either.
the 6 speed shifts much better than the previous 4 speed.

motoguy128 · September 2009

An increase in power in a engine is a tricky thing ot evealuate and not a good measure of the engines overall performance. Smoetimes more power is gained by using more fuel, other times it's gained by better overall combustion efficiency, such an increase in the compression ratio.

The transmission was clearly the biggest improvment, but the increase in engine performance may have allowed hte enigne to use a lower gear, where it previously would have unlocked the torque converter or downshifted.

I still think overall the EPA ratings are somewhat suspect. A better measure would be to publush fuel consumption numbers for the vehcile when traveling at a steady speed, and when accerating from a stop to 60mph at a given rate, and holding a given speed up an incline. It would be much more objective than the simulated test cycle the EPA uses now.

explorerx4 · September 2009

i don't care about objective. the real world difference is approaching 20%. pretty good with that.

cannon3 · May 2010

This vehicle belongs to my wife. After about a month of test driving and research she chose the Ford Escape. She chose the 2.5 XLT 4WD automatic in steel blue with the 204A package.

When she test drove the CRV vs the Escape, she preferred the styling of the Escape. She also commented on the driving/seating position. Along with commenting on the overall driving feel of the Escape. Just my .02$ worth here.

stever · November 2011

"The 2013 Ford Escape saw a bigger surge of consumer interest than did the 2012 Honda CR-V after the competing crossovers made their debut at the Los Angeles Auto Show last week, according to Edmunds.com. According to Edmunds.com site traffic data, the Ford Escape enjoyed a 95 percent lift in average consideration in the days following its unveiling last Wednesday. The CR-V, meanwhile, saw a jump of 25 percent over the same period.

This is just one of many battles to come in the next 12 to14 months within the crossover SUV segment, said Jessica Caldwell, senior analyst at Edmunds.com. The Escape and CR-V will fight to outdo each other, but theyll also have a lot of other competitors in an increasingly strong segment that includes other popular choices like the Chevrolet Equinox, Nissan Rogue and Toyota RAV4.

Escape Passes CR-V In Consumer Interest (AutoObserver)

stever · January 2015

This discussion pretty much died off after being very active for a number of years. The CR-V prices paid discussions are really busy here, the Escape ones not so much.

Not sure why that is - the sales race is neck and neck with Honda taking the honors for 2014 by ~25,000 units.

Any recent buyers cross-shop these two SUVs?

Top 10 Best-Selling Vehicles for 2014

explorerx4 · January 2015

Personally, I feel like the CR-V and Escape are not cross shopped very much, anymore.
A CR-V would be considered against a RAV-4.
An Escape has too much styling and tech for most CR-V drivers. They are just more conservative.

stever · January 2015

lol, thanks, that ought to stir up the pot a bit.

explorerx4 · January 2015

Should I mention power? Oops, just did.

truckie4life · January 2015

As close minded as it might be, consumers are faced with the decision of "should I buy a Ford or a Honda"? We know which one sounds better based off of reliability....

explorerx4 · January 2015

The sales numbers of both are close enough that 'reliability' doesn't seem to be a differentiator.

henryn · January 2015

I can't fit in an Escape. Not at all, period.

I do fit, and quite comfortably, in a CR-V.

Case closed.

berri · January 2015

Why is Ford still making cramped cars when Americans are getting taller? I've found on rentals that the Explorer is also short on driver legroom compared to most of the comparable competition.

As for sales, Escapes are in rental fleets, CRV's not. I've seen some pretty nice sales incentives on new Escapes lately as well.

explorerx4 · January 2015

Escape does have a good number of fleet sales, doesn't detract from it being a good choice.
I just bought a CPO 2013 SEL as my new winter vehicle. Nice mid level, 2.0, 5 level heated seats, 18 inch rims, touch screen.
It drives great although it sat on the dealer's lot since September. I expect it to get even better with regular driving.
Although I'm a touch over 6 ft, I had to raise the driver's seat up a bit to get comfortable.

Clint · January 2015

I have owned both. Including a 2013 Escape. After one year, I got rid of it. Typical Ford, so many issues. Thankfully they were covered by the warranty. I thought it wise to get rid of it before the warranty period ended. My past experiences with Ford vehicles was difficult. After one year, I had concerns the 2013 Escape would be as bad as my prior Ford vehicles. Replaced it with a 2014 CRV, much better in all areas.

explorerx4 · January 2015

My wife has a 2013 Escape with the 2.0 approaching 35k. It has had some recalls, but nothing was actually wrong. One of the kids is driving a 2004 with 130k that was handed down a couple of times. It's going to need it's most expensive repair, replacement of a lower suspension arm, about $400.

henryn · January 2015

We bought a 2005 Mazda Tribute, new. 99% the same as the Escape. Plenty of interior room, performed decently with the V6. We kept it 4 years, about 70k miles. The biggest complaints I had were the OEM tires, and the really small gas tank. The new Escape has much less room for the driver. Much less.

explorerx4 · January 2015

It's true that the current generation of Escape is not as roomy as the previous one. If you want something bigger with a V6, Ford will sell you an Edge. 3 of us went on vacation in it last summer and there was enough room for everything when we put a cargo box on the roof.

henryn · January 2015

I like the Edge, except for the seat. My oversize rump does not fit comfortably. If you like the Edge, you should check out the Nissan Murano. Very, very similar in size, a little cheaper, a little more comfortable, a little faster.

CR-V vs Escape

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles