Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
We have an '03 CR-V. I agree with your assessment of the CR-V front seats. Not only is the legroom sacrificed for more back seat legroom, but the seat bottom cushions are too thin for my bony cheeks and lack long enough thigh support for me (6' 5"). My wife thinks they are fine (5' 7"). I modified the seat track to get an additional 2" of travel rearward which helps the legroom, but haven't attempted to do anything with the bottom cushion.
Whats the deal with the fire in the CRV's.. is this an isolated thing?
Also, the car is being driven to the dealer from another one, wi;ll have about 30 miles on it? Anyone see a problem with this?
Thanks,
Interestingly, this was not a problem when I drove. It was the front passenger seat that just didn't seem to have enough room for me (we were shopping for my wife's car).
What's funny is that the rear seat has a *lot* more leg room than the front, so they could easily give it 3" more seat travel and noone would mind.
Maybe hawkeye took pictures? I raised the front seat track on my Miata for more thigh support, and some really tall folks have modified their Outback's seat track also.
-juice
It's more likely, IMHO, that they designed the seating position with an eye on where the body is positioned in relation to the B pillar. Put the seat too far back and the seat belt will not hold the occupant. Nor will the B pillar provide the same protection in a side impact crash.
On weekends, I have to take passenger's seat and give the key to my wife. I like my CR-V, but for this reason, maybe I should buy a Pilot instead.
Is the side air bag seat mounted? If so it would move back with the seat.
-juice
The seatbelt is another story. It's attached to a stationary pillar. The belt is designed to hold the driver against the seatback. If the seat is shifted back behind the pillar (or even flush with it), the belt is going to be slack.
-juice
I have absolutely NO problems with leg room, arms room, head room, butt room, etc. .
It might be a problem for some, but do not blame Honda for it, blame McDonalds... :-).
I think seat width is fine. Headroom to spare. The bottom cushion could be longer for more thigh support, but I feel that way about almost every car I've ever sat in.
The front driver's seats really benefits from that arm rest, without it I felt like I didn't have enough side support.
-juice
Big Macs don't make anything longer, but they make EVERYTHING wider, which
adds to discomfort. What bothers me sometimes is the sun light from the side,
which I block using the sun wiser. Interesting, I did not have that problem with other cars.
Also, during rain/snow, when you open the door, you got water/snow coming from that rubber seal.
Roof do not have enough overhang to protect seats from water.
During that kind of weather I got towel handy to protect my seats.
I found the seats somewhat more comfortable in the 2003. The cushion is larger, the adjustments are more... well... adjustable, and although the position with the steering wheel is still bus-like, it feels more natural in the 2003.
With the '99, I do have more foot room, but the real difference is a proper dead pedal on the floor. The "bump" in the 2003 model isn't big enough for my size 11 shoes.
FWIW, I'm 6'1", 190 lbs, and wear a 33" inseam (you'll never find them on the rack).
Having driven several small SUVs over the past 5 years, I rate the new CR-V about par for the course. Some have more legroom, but even smaller seat cushions. Others force you to sit on the floor like a race car. On the whole, most of them a just plain similar. These are entry level SUVs and you get what you pay for.
"Daughter took 2003 CR-V to dealer fo Oil Change at 2900+ miles. Three miles down the road after the oil change at 2900+ moiles, a fire started
in the engine compartment. When the fire department finally arrived, the car
was totally engulfed and will not be repairable.
1. Any history of this. 2. Suggestions as to possible cause? Oil fill cap had been replaced."
I think it was Varmint who said Honda monitors this site. Two pieces of advice for Honda
1. You had better get to the bottom of these before someone gets hurt. No more "undetermined". It is not rocket science.
2. When loyal customers (I think I speak for all the people on the NHTSA website) have had traumatic experiences with your product, treat them nicely first, figure out the cause later.
Others force you to sit on the floor
You're probably referring to the Forester? hee hee
Hey, at least Subaru actually uses the Forester in WRC Reconaissance runs, to make course notes for rallies. And the XT model is as quick as some race cars.
-juice
Forester's seat is only slightly higher than the WRX, but at least it is higher. The shifter is also longer for better reach.
CR-V has a really high vantage point. I think in my Miata I'm eye level with your shins! LOL
-juice
I checked all 'component' lists.
People who filed complains were not sure which component to blame and reported them
multiple times for different components (just in case?). It is confusing. I was able to find 3 unique cases(or so I think?).
Which belongs to sabrina and which to the latest case? How many unique cases do we have?
Note, in the first case it said: Fire: NO ????.
Second case did not report date of failure! Sloppy reports?
If reports are sloppy or confusing people(or Honda) would treat them accordingly.
Here they are:
Report Date : December 30, 2003 at 03:00 PM
Make : HONDA
Model : CR-V
Year : 2003
Crash : No
Fire : No
Number of Injuries: 0
ODI ID Number : 10051179
Date of Failure: December 17, 2003
Component: ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING
Summary:
I BROUGHT MY 2003 HONDA CR-V EX MODEL IN TO MAINE MALL HONDA IN SOUTH PORTLAND, MAINE FOR ROUTINE 10,000 MILE SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE, WHICH INCLUDES CHANGING THE OIL, ROTATING TIRES AND INSPECTING FLUID LEVELS.
WITHIN 5 MILES OF LEAVING THE DEALERS LOCATION, THE ENGINE CAUGHT FIRE AND THE CAR WAS A TOTAL LOSS. I FIRST NOTICED SMOLE BY LOOKING IN THE REAR VIEW MIRROR APPROXIAMTELY 2 MILES AFTER LEAVING THE DEALERS LOCATION.
THINKING IT WAS JUST SOME SPILLED OIL, I KEPT ON DRIVING UNTIL I NOTICED THE LOW OIL LIGHT COME ON THE DASHBOARD. I PULLED THE CAR OVER AND SMELLED OIL. AT THAT POINT I OPENED THE HOOD OF THE CAR AND SAW FLAMES IN THE ENGINE. THE MAINE STATE POLICE ARRIVED WITHIN 5 MINUTES AND DETERMINED THAT THE FIRE WAS TOO FAR PROGREESED TO SAVE THE CAR. THE SOUTH PORTLAND AND SCARBOROUGH MAINE FIRE DEPARTMENTS ARRIVED WITHIN 10 MINUTES TO PUT OUT THE FIRE.*AK
*****************************************************************- - - - - *****************
Report Date : December 30, 2003 at 03:11 PM
Make: HONDA
Model: CR-V
Year: 2003
Complaint Number: 10042645
Date of Failure: ?
Component: ELECTRICAL SYSTEM: WIRING: FRONT UNDERHOOD
Summary:
AFTER HAVING THE SHIFT CABLE LINKAGE CORROSION RECALL REPAIRS PERFORMED,
WHILE DRIVING AT 30/35 MPH, VEHICLE CAUGHT ON FIRE FROM UNDER THE
WINDSHIELD. THE CAUSE OF THE FIRE WAS UNDETERMINED. *AK
*****************************************************************- *****************
Report Date : December 30, 2003 at 03:27 PM
Make: HONDA
Model: CRV
Year: 2003
Complaint Number: 10045221
Date of Failure: October 6, 2003
Component: ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING:ENGINE
Summary:
6 DAYS AFTER HAVING THROTTLE CABLE RECALL AND A/T SHIFT CABLE RECALL AND
O/C, CAR BURST INTO FLAMES (TOTALED) WHILE DRIVING 20-25 MPH. HONDA SAYS
NOT DEFECT? CAR HAD 8200 MILES ON ODOMETER. NO EVIDENCE THAT OIL FROM
O/C CAUSED FIRE. HONDA INVESTIGATIONS HAS NO ANSWER. FIRE STARTED OR WAS
FIRST EVIDENT IN DRIVERS WHEEL WELL AREA. *LA
**********************
'Practical' approach: Do we need to drive with a fire extinguisher?
I know in some foreign countries they are mandatory!
regards,
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
I was reviewing the nhtsa database but December is not posted yet.
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/problems/MonthlyDefects/
I saw this one post on google:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe- =UTF-8&threadm=M1mIb.12230%24lo3.7122%40newsread2.news.pas.ea- rthlink.net&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3DHonda%2B2003%2BCR-V- %2Bfires%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26selm%3DM1m- Ib.12230%2524lo3.7122%2540newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net%26rnum- %3D1
Thanks,
Jim L.
I strongly prefer more car-like models like the CR-V, Forester, and RAV4. At least the driving experience.
-juice
regards,
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
They are under different components, I presume because the people did not know where to put them. There is no category for "undetermined fire". That is why mine is where it is. I just chose the closest component. What they are under is in no way determinative of what the cause is. What would you put it under?
I do not know why there is a CRV and CR-V. I was puzzled too.
If Honda is addressing the issue it is news to me. The yhave not contacted me or my insurance company. Also, these 4 are not the last ones I will be reporting on. I just make sure I have confirmation before I say anything.
I just report the facts, you make your own judgements
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
varmint "CR-V vs Escape" Dec 31, 2003 3:37pm
Maybe I should start a separate thread on "what makes a small SUV small?"
Do you even know what body on frame construction and 2 speed transfer cases are ? Thats HOW they make REAL 4WD vehicles which are capable of true offroading and unlike the gurlish V which are Civics with AWD, why dont you just buy an AWD minivan and stop pretending your in something its not. My wife drives an 01 'V' and I drive it from time to time and its a very nice car but dont mistaken the difference between the CRV and real 4wd trucks. I offroad regularily and I would never dream of taking my wifes whimpy little CRV offroad, some of you guys babble on about not underestimating how great the CRV is offroad but sheesh I can take a beater Corolla offroad and if you beat on it hard enough on the trail it will make it up to certain point until you break something and thats not what offroading is all about, plus according to my wifes owners manual the warranty is void if I take it offroad and bust something.
No. For one thing, all false modesty aside, I know a heck of lot more about them than the typical buyer. I also use mine off-pavement more than the typical buyer.
"Do you even know what body on frame construction and 2 speed transfer cases are?"
Yes, and that is exactly why I tend to avoid them.
Don't take my comments out of context. I know there are good reasons for building SUVs on truck platforms. But there are also good reasons for building uni-body variants. (This is where I would start asking you if you know about crush zones, fuel econonmy, drivetrain binding, etc.) In the context of this discussion, I was simply stating a fact. The X-Terra is based on a truck. That gives it much different characteristics than the unibodies in this class. In fact, some differences are so great, I tend to treat them like two separate classes.
If you are looking for a general recommendation on which to buy, it would help if you told us how you are going to use it. Both vehicles have their strong points.
As for the fires, the latest posts are in the CR-V problems thread. We really don't know anything other than the fact that a problem has been reported.
Thanks for your feedback.
Steve
One look at payloads, curb weight, towing capacity, etc., tells you they are mid-sized.
Coincidentally, I test drove a Grand Cherokee Columbia Edition today. We got a $50 offer for a gift card at Sharper Image, so why not?
It only confirmed my preference for car-based SUVs. Sorry, "gurlish pretenders", LOL.
The truck has a nasty driveline whine, audible at any speed. Salesman said it would go away when warm but it didn't. NVH was just awful, lots of wind and tire noise. The HO V8 was torquey, but not any quicker than the last 'V I test drove, and certainly not worth the 15/20 EPA numbers.
Unless I just had to tow a boat or something large, there's just no way you could pry me away from my gurly pretender (a Forester in my case).
For $6 grand less, I could get a Forester XT that could run circles around the GC, handling and acceleration, how's that for gurlish? I realize people have different needs and preferences, but mine favor a more refined, car-like, and yes sporty driving experience.
-juice
I do NOT need Frame-base 4WD.
I never go off road - I go to work every day.
I used to work in Africa years ago and I know WHAT REAL
Off Road truck is: Good old rusty Landrover, Russian rugged jeep or Toyota trucks, which I never even saw here in U.S. And remember: no plastic parts at the front! They would turn into "noodles" pretty soon. No fancy electrical stuff! Tolerance on fuel(with dust and rust)- need a good fuel filter and a radiator which would take water with frogs. (More primitive - the better).
But I do not live in Africa - I live in the U.S. and
I need a reliable, roomy, economical, comfortable runaround vehicle (CR-V) with occasional capability of handling snow storms, period.
My dad worked in Belize and Suriname, and they had UN-spec vehicles in their fleet, for REAL off road use, as you say. The Land Cruiser was among their favorites, but let's look at how they were equipped:
* diesel engine
* manual transmission
* vinyl seats and floor mats
* steel wheels with nobby tires
* clean, narrow body with no fender flares
You are masquerading around in a luxury vehicle, a tuxedo on what underneath used to be an off road ready vehicle, but is now dressed up for use at the Country Club. Face it. Automatic tranny, auto climate control, gas engine, heated leather seats, wool carpets, huge alloys wheels with pavement-biased tires.
Who is the pretender here? Honestly? You gonna take a $60 grand vehicle off road? Scratch up those huge fender flares? Even if you do, is that particularly smart?
You have a very, very nice luxury truck for pavement use, by the way.
AWD Minivan? Let's rule on the DCX and GM vans right away for not meeting reliability standards for the crowd here. That leaves the Sienna, which has NO SPARE TIRE, so it cannot be allowed to drive on the beach.
Not an alternative for lots of people here, sorry.
Too bad I can't import those real Land Cruisers, equipped the way that fleet was, to the US. And just so you know, those cost about $22,000, so the other $40 grand or so you paid was for that tuxedo.
Nice tux! LOL
-juice
The CRV is a great little street suv. It is a 4 wheel independent unibody based off the Civic platform. Look under your rear bumper. You see those long skinny suspension arms mounted to a dropped a-arm mounting point?
That is a passenger car suspension.
Besides having NO articulation, that suspension would snap in half on stuff a Land Cruiser or 4Runner would easily walk through.
The "real time 4wd" in the CRV is fine for on-road duties but isn't even close to being designed for off-road! It is beyond laughable for you to even compare the CRV to any real SUV off road.
Honda will gladly tell you the exact same thing! Maybe you feel mighty in a CRV going down a bumpy dirt road but that isn't considered off-roading.
You need a real SUV for off roading. That is why people use Land Cruisers, 4Runners and Xterras. Unlike on the street, you can't fake your way up and down a mountain range.
Sorry, this is your wakeup call. The CRV is an excellent product designed for on-road activities. Look around, there is a good reason people don't lift and wheel CRV's.
As for the American Land Cruiser being a "pretender", that is really showing some ignorance. It is one of the all-time greatest SUV's on the planet! Can't off road? Check out http://realcruiser.com/ and you tell me.
But thanks for making my point for me - those look like properly equipped SUVs, knobby tires and mostly older models that don't cost $60 grand.
-juice
"Automatic tranny, auto climate control, gas engine, heated leather seats, wool carpets, huge alloys wheels with pavement-biased tires.
Who is the pretender here? Honestly? You gonna take a $60 grand vehicle off road? Scratch up those huge fender flares? Even if you do, is that particularly smart?"
Almost every Land Cruiser on that site fits your description above. Pavement biased tires? Have you seen the CRV's? Have you seen the LX's? Even with bald tires it would still be better off road.
Who cares how much it costs? It's all relative.
Many of those Land Crusiers cost those owners alot of money and $60 large is alot more common than you think.
What is important is the capability of the SUV.
The LX470 (FJ100) is supremely capable. Not as good as the 90's Toyota Land Cruiser but still so much more capable off road than a CRV ever could be.
The CRV is an excellent on-road compact suv. I really like them and Hondas in general. However, people like VMAN make laughable statements about the CRV's capablilities. I wouldn't off road a Civic sedan which sounds about as ridiculous as saying the CRV is superior to real SUV's
I drove all over the Outer Banks and didn't see any newer LX470s/Land Cruisers, only one or two decade-old models. I bet less then 3% truly use those capabilities, so it's fair to say the other 97% are pretenders, no?
Capable? Sure, but virtually noone makes use of that capability.
CR-V owners use RT4WD every time it rains, snows, even on light gravel trails, dirt roads, sand or other unimproved surfaces. I think it's fair to say owners use their (lesser) capabilities far more often.
-juice
Most of my clients in a northern NJ HIGH INCOME area have SUV's (Lexus and Hummers are a big favorite). I find it pretty funny that many times I have to go out to the truck with them to show them how to work some of the 4 wheel drive features.. some of them wont even take the truck out if it's snowing!!!..
so while the big SUV's may be capable off roaders, I would bet that 99% of those buying them never go off road..unless your talking about the ramp leading to the mall parking lot. They buy them because they feel they need the size for car pooling but in reality a mini van or a CRV is a much better choice for them. They just like the way they look in a big SUV and be damned with the cost! They also feel that they sit up higher so they get better cell phone reception!!!
Capable? Sure, but virtually noone makes use of that capability.
CR-V owners use RT4WD every time it rains, snows, even on light gravel trails, dirt roads, sand or other unimproved surfaces. I think it's fair to say owners use their (lesser) capabilities far more often."
_________________________________________________
Most CRV owners don't take their cars off road either. Are they all "pretenders?"
I am talking about the capability of a Land Cruiser and LX470, NOT the capabilities of the drivers! It is not my place to judge how owners use their vehicles. I am judging the capabilities of the PRODUCTS.
LX470s and Land Cruisers have FULL TIME 4WD so they use their system all the time. Besides that, they have a CENTER LOCKING DIFFERENTIAL, 4LO GEARING and SRA.
The CRV is a great on-road go-getter. It is in no way comparable to the off-road capabilities of a Land Cruiser, LX470 or 4Runner.
Why not focus on the CRV's true strengths (great MPG, lots of room in a small pkg, inexpensive, good quality, comfortable,etc) instead of trying to fabricate complete falsehoods on what a CRV can do offroad, where it has no place because it wasn't designed for.
Don't take my word for it, read Edmunds review or any other. Look under your CRV and look under a LX. Look at the size and construction of the suspension.
You'd have to ask a CR-V owner, LOL.
I don't doubt that those SUVs are capable, and I don't even disagree with what you've stated. Though you have to admit the idea of taking a $60k designer luxury SUV off road is just silly.
Someone was trolling (not you, BTW) and said everyone here would be better off in a minivan, I don't believe that is the case. That's all I'm saying.
-juice
If I owned a CRV (which I would be proud to own if I ever needed one) I would never subject it to that kind of abuse because I would want it to last 100,000 miles and not have expensive suspension or mechanical damage because I know it was not designed to off road.
Now before I go any further let me say I LOVE my V its awesome are town and perfect for my family. Now we started off on the highway, about 3 hours travel then we hit some logging road heading up the camp site then the convoy moved off to a road which didnt look so bad, it was rocky and there were some 6 inch deep washouts but my salesguy assured me no problem with light offroading and some members of the the other board assured me if a Liberty or Gran Vitara can make it then it will be easy for me. Thats where the story took a nasty turn and I HOPE LIKE HECK HONDA IS LISTENING ?
My V had problems on the light rocky section right from the get go, I thought there was a mechanical problem for sure, while the others were easily crawling up the slope my V kept stopping in the rocks and one wheel kept spinning I had to make a run at several sections with foot to the floor and I was upset because I felt like I was abusing my new to me shiny V. Anyways I was holding up the convoy really bad and it was embarrasing and I was really disappointed. Finally the last straw fording a 6 inch deep stream, No problem but to get out of the stream was a deep rut, again the Liberty Grand Vitara and Cherokee climbed out there easily and they were travelling really slow so I thought this will be easy, as I approach the exit to the stream the V slams to a stop, I floor it and wheels are spinning, I had to back up and make a full throttle run at it but when I did the rear suspension got hung up on some small rocks and I was messed!, anyways to make a long story shorter and $2100 later and a $310 towbill back to civilization and one broken ego.
Honda would not even consider touching me with warranty and my insurance company said no way since I was offroad. To finish off my story we packed up the gear in the Gran Cherokee and left the V on the side of the stream as we continued on but my trip was shot and I was in no mood for a good time, I couldnt go back because this would have forced one of the other guys to drive me. Anyways I still love my V but it doesnt go near offroad trails and despite the fact that these guys on Hondasuv go offroading well I came the conclusion that you can offroad with it but something will break so dont bother, it was an expensive lesson to be learned. I am also having rear tire alignment problems even after spending over $2k to get the suspension fixed.
When I spoke to my salesman about this light offroading claim he said he meant smooth logging roads and nothing more. NO the CRV will not offroad very well unless you floor it everywhere at the risk of breaking stuff but as a city SUV it is excellent. Sorry for the sob story but this is just a word of warning to all who think they have an offroad vehicle,
unfortunately while most on this board know what the V is good for most of the guys on hondasuv think differently,they always dis and knock other SUVs like Xterras and so forth and brag about their offroading trips but now I know the difference between awd car based and 4wd truck based SUVs and if the guys on hondasuv knew the difference they might not have showered me with such BAD advice. Its still my fault for listening to such ignorance. Im gonna keep my V for 100,000 miles provided I can get the rear suspension back to normal and it is the most reliable vehicle I have owned next to my Accord but I will never take it offroad again.
I'm not suggesting that CR-V owners go rock hopping, but it seems to meet the light duty needs that are more common anyway. In other words, they are using the vehicle as it was intended to be used. IMO that's not pretending, it's just practical.
My roommate and 2 friends all had Wranglers at one point in time, and we'd go off road. All 3 had lifts, and still each would suffer damage on each trip. Brake lines, clutches, we even bent a leaf spring on one. Each time they'd limp home.
You gotta pay to play, it goes with the territory that there will be damage when you challenge a vehicle like that. That's why I think it's kind of silly to take a $60k LX470 off road, scratch up that gorgeous pearlescent paint.
-juice