Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
3.4l vs. 2.0l and the 4 banger is slightly quicker? Even with automatic? That's a strong argument for the efficiencies of a smaller engine, if you ask me. Unless you tow and really need that torque.
EPA mileage is 18/24, right? That's poor compared to the CR-V, RAV4, and Forester. It's competitive with the Escape but you don't get that car's acceleration.
-juice
Length: 160.8", width: 71.2", height: 70.9", and wheelbase: 102". The dimensions were given in mm, which I converted to ".
I had the same complaint about the CR-V, which even suffers from a bit of torque steer.
-juice
My perceptions exactly! When you translate the size of the Element, 71" height, to the proportions in the photos it sure seems a lot bigger than the CR-V.
If the CR-V were 71" tall (other dimensions remaining the same) it would look tipsy.
Come on 106" wheelbase!
http://www.urbanracer.com/features/gallery.asp?pic=nyias02/0012& title=NY+International+Auto+Show+2002
credits to urbanracer.com
In photos with people, in particular the above, the Element looks huge!!!? Looks to be about the same size as the Pilot, which is also photoed at urban racer site!
If it is that big, the 2.4 is going to have a tough time moving it.
Agreed. Until the Element, I thought the CR-V was the likely first Honda SUV to receive the IMA hybrid drivetrain, but the unconventional Element now looks like an even better candidate. Based on demographics of course..;-)
varmint:
In spite of my wishful thinking, Element will probably not be as large as Pilot, though it could quite easily approach Pilot cargo volume of 90 cf. The best I could hope for would be to split the difference between the Pilot and CR-V (72cf) at about 80cf. This wouldn't be difficult, and without increasing mass, or even wheelbase.
It would probably be like the Ody, MDX, Pilot trio; varying capabilities and volume, but with the same/similar drivetrain and mass. All three are about 4400 lbs. I could see where the Element would be like the Ody; much more volume (150cf plus in Ody) but with same drivetrain as the CRV. No change in mass. I know, no increase in power to weight ratio.....until next generation (03) Accord 170 plus hp 2.4L motor is installed...
Another interesting tidbit is that in above referenced C&D June comparo of "crossover" (whatever) vehicles, the Focus ZX5 (?) was listed as having hatch opening width of 40" with overall width of 67" (I think). Encourages my optimism that Element with 70" plus overall width can have tailgate opening of 48".
denise31:
thankyouthankyouthankyouverramush
And please share your opines and perceptions as well.
Hybrid: I like the idea, but I see one major obstacle. The battery in a hybrid is huge. Like the size of a suitcase. In the Civic, it fits under the rear seat. In the Insight, it takes up quite a bit of space under the cargo floor. For the Element, they would have to change the floor plan.
OTOH, the CR-V does have some space under the cargo floor. Things might need to be moved around a bit to make that area larger or a better shape, but it could be done.
Now I can see why there will only be enough space for 2 in the back.
Honda probably lost money with the Insight because it was too low-volume. They'll very likely choose the CR-V rather than the Element, since it has more mainstream appeal.
None of the photos show the deal pedal area, it's one thing the CR-V could improve on.
-juice
CR-V has them on automatics only, so maybe Element will get them.
Then again, this is for young, active males and they don't need no stinkin' arm rests! ;-)
-juice
I looked up the specs on the Aztek, and they're ugly. The specs, I mean. ;-)
C&D lists a summary and compared to the CR-V it costs more, slower to 60, slower in the 1/4, slower trap speed, lower top speed, longer braking distance, less lateral grip, and less fuel efficiency. Worse in every single category listed.
But there's always styling! LOL
-juice
I'm thinking you don't
Why don't you do that summary with a real test of an 02' not an 01'.
I think you might find your statements to be very false, but hey if you wanna go with that we can. I'm all for a debate!
Especially one I know I'm going to win!
I'm sure the painted cladding made it significantly faster than the 10.8 seconds C&D managed. All it needs now is some yellow stickers!
-juice
I would more call the Element's styling a light hearted thwack. Or maybe a dope-slap, ya that's it the Honda Dope-Slap EX!
"The four passenger Element has two front buckets separated with ‘walk-through’ access between them, and two rear seats that appear to be a single bench, but are split 50/50. The front passenger seat includes a seatback that reverses so that the front passenger can face the rear seats when the vehicle is stopped."
I wrote in saying looking at the pictures I don't think so. They said it came from Honda Canada press release and would recheck it with Honda.
So today canadiandriver.com wrote back:
Honda Canada sent me this reply about the rear-facing front seat in the Element..
"The concept vehicle "Model X" had front seats that had the seatback flip
towards the front of the car to make a backwards facing seat. The Honda
Element prototype as shown at the New York auto show had more conventional
front seats that did not have this feature. The production version of the
Honda Element is not expected until early 2003, so we will have to wait to
see the "final version"."
Greg Wilson
Editor
CanadianDriver.com - "Canada's Online Auto Magazine"
There's hope.
But this may be because the Element is shocking to look at, while the Pilot is very conservative.
I'm sure the Pilot will sell more units, in fact I have no doubt they'll sell every one they can build.
Pineapples may look wild, but plain apples sell a whole lot better.
-juice
OTOH, the Pilot's appeal isn't in the styling. Only those folks interested in SUVs are going to bother with it.
I have doubts that the Stream's 7-seater configuration will meet US safety standards. Given the way that the first gen Ody was received, I don't see the Stream making a big impact on their marketing folks.
Roomy, utilitarian, with 106" wheelbase.
-jim
I like the Stream, it's very space efficient.
-juice
200hp should be good.
what happen to that eng?
and why it is not use in the element or cv-r?
Still, their current level of quality control does not even come close to meeting my standards. A Focus ZTW wagon might have met our needs but I didn't even consider it.
Civics could use a little more displacement, and I hope Honda dots the Is and crosses the Ts a little better. CR had the new one at 10% more problems than average, after a lifetime of earning straight As.
CR-V was Honda's best student, though, so I bet the Element will score well.
-juice
The base CR-V only comes in automatic, but maybe the Element will have a 5 speed, which is cheaper.
-juice
Judging by the recent Pilot prices, Element $16K to 21K will be more like $16.9 for LX, and $22 for EX AWD....=}
No problem bro..
I will gladly sponsor you here in the USofA to pay US$ for an AWD Element...=)
Jeff in muddyland
-juice
I hope it's still a good value at EX-L MSRP of $30,520 plus $460 delivery = $30,980.
And where can I get 7/100 warranty for $775?
Apparantly called "crossover" vehicles: "meaning... part sedan, part station wagon and part sport-utility vehicle"
http://www.auto.com/reviews/matrix19_20020319.htm
From Honda it's more like $1200. $775 sounds like a bargain.