2001 - 2006 Honda CR-Vs

isellhondas · April 2005

Good information. All front wheel drive cars tend to have a bit of torque steer. It's a charastic of FWD. The early years of FWD cars were a handful to drive if you weren't used to it.

cdlinz · April 2005

certainly wish not to be argumentative. i did not mean to address engine fires in my post. just how prevalent are they? i personally am not inclined to invest in a fire extinguisher just yet. i was merely responding to the implication that the old crv was somehow better than the new one and the implication that the old crv crowd is somehow cooler than the new one. an engine fire problem, though dastardly is certainly due to an unexpected engineering quirk and in my opinion in no way detracts from the overall improvement crv2 is over crv1. as to the torquesteer/pttr, i myself have admittedly experienced and cursed this, but as far as i'm concerned this is a reasonable compromise to make in exchange for a 4 cyl engine that generates 160+ fp of torque at the front wheels.

tidester · April 2005

The best place to discuss the engine fires is here: Honda CR-V engine fires

As far as "investing" in a fire extinguisher, that's a good idea for ANY vehicle and they aren't really all that expensive.

tidester, host

varmint · April 2005

varmint, "Honda CR-V Owners: FAQ" #17, 15 Apr 2005 3:20 pm

bigeaux · April 2005

cdlinz,

I think you nailed it:

i'd say the new crv, though not a stunner in any category, is as close to being the perfect everyday vehicle as you can get.

We've had our 2005 LX FWD for 2.5 weeks. It's not stunning in any particular way. I don't think I'll be writing any poetry about it.

But the value of the package, taken in it's totality, compares favorably with just about everything in it's class. It's simply a very practical vehicle.

steve royal · April 2005

We'll have to wait and see how much torque steer the arbitrator will say is OK for a vehicle. In the mean time, you can characterize a vehicle that insists on going one direction when the driver tries to steer the vehicle the other way any way you want. If the steering wheel is PULLING one way when I am PULLING the steering wheel the opposite direction, the most descriptive way to define the problem is the vehicle is PULLING TO THE RIGHT. I don't care if the reason the steering wheel wants to go the opposite direction than the direction it is being steered is caused by torque, alignment, or a little gremlin living inside the steering column.

I understand that the problem is most likely severe torque in this instance. That does not mean that the steering wheel is not pulling to the right. It means the reason that it is pulling to the right is due to severe torque steer. If we accept your logic, the only reason that a vehicle could ever suffer from PTTR would be if there was an alignment problem. I believe there are other factors that cause a vehicle to pull to the right other than the sole reason of alignment. Steve

cdlinz · April 2005

i challenge anyone to show me a $22k auto with this blend of performance, safety, reliability, practicality, efficiency. anybody? station wagons (passat, vibe, matrix, mazda5) not included. want to know why i don't include station wagons? override. that's right, OVER-RIDE. we are sharing the road with f-150s, tahoes, etc. as you know, frequently in a crash the taller vehicle's momentum overrides the smaller's bumper/safety features - they become moot. the crv is a 'high' vehicle, and can go 'bumper to bumper' with the tahoe or f-150 or dodge ram or silverado or explorer or whatever. if you doubt this, let me relate the story that sold me on the necessity of buying an suv. a nurse from our hospital was driving a civic: undoubtedly small, but safe car. she had a head-on collision with an f-150. the f-150 overrode the civic. she and her two young children (in carseats in the backseat) were all decapitated. so. the crv has all of the good qualities mentioned above, and is tall enough to take a blow from the big boys without being over-ridden.

lmoyer1 · April 2005

I live in Dallas, Texas and going to buy a CRV this month. Is AWD necessary or worth it or is FWD all you need. Just seems like something else to use gas and break.
Lyle

lmoyer1 · April 2005

When will the present CRV model change. Are they on a 5 year cycle. If so what year are we in?

Thanks
Lyle

kyfdx · April 2005

I don't profess a lot of knowledge about Dallas, but I doubt you would ever need AWD there.. or so little that it wouldnt be worth the extra cost.

But, the only FWD model available is the LX.. So, if you want all the EX goodies (alloy wheels, sunroof, six-disc indash CD, etc.), you'll have to opt for an AWD version..

Also, if you want a manual transmission, then the only choice is the EX AWD.

If you don't want those things, then the LX FWD is the way to go... However, if you want all of those options, you aren't paying a big premium for the AWD portion of it.. and the fuel savings and repairs have proven to be a neglible increase.

I can't really speak as to whether the lack of AWD hurts resale in a place like Dallas.. Though, I'm sure the extra EX options would help in that regard.

The latest word has a new model of CR-V coming out in Fall of '06 as an '07 model.... If that is the case, then the '06 model will me the last year of the current generation..

regards,
kyfdx

bigeaux · April 2005

that's right, OVER-RIDE. we are sharing the road with f-150s, tahoes, etc.

That was also a consideration for me. It's like an arms race out there on the road. The higher risk of roll-over in an SUV is more than offset by the overall improvement in survivability vs large vehicles when compared to the smaller sport wagon options.

lmoyer1 · April 2005

Thanks for the input. The Honda dealership told me there would be a model change in Sept when the 2005's come out.
Lyle

isellhondas · April 2005

The 2005's have been out for a long time now so I assume you meant 2006's?

Unless Honda changes their cycle I wouldn't expect any/many changes.

jwb18t · April 2005

Anybody out there bought the factory rack for the 05 CRV? Or is it better to go with the aftermarket? We have a 98 CRV EX that we are considering trading in and buying a new 05 CRV. Currently have a Yakima roof rack and put a hitch rack on to handle our bikes, skis, kayaks, luggage box. Probably will put a hitch on the new CRV but will still need some roof capacity.

drive62 · April 2005

"It means the reason that it is pulling to the right is due to severe torque steer."

From the above mentioned FAQ's (a must read BTW):

"Torque steer is not the same thing as PTTR. Torque steer is a problem for many FWD vehicles with a transversely-mounted engine."

Since you say it's not PTTR, either the vehicle has excessive torque steer by design, or yours is different from all others. I don't think the former is true. So if it's the latter I agree you should get your money back.

theracoon · April 2005

When will the present CRV model change. Are they on a 5 year cycle. If so what year are we in?

The CR-V was redesigned in 2002, so the 2005 models are year 4. Look for a redesign with the 2007 model year.

steve royal · April 2005

drive62,

I still do not understand why a vehicle that has "excessive torque steer by design" is not a problem. You seem to insinuate that no matter how much torque steer a vehicle exhibits, as long as the misdirection of the vehicle is caused on purpose or 'by design' by the manufacturer and caused by torque steer that is remains safe? I just cannot agree with this logic. There has to be limits on anything that prevents a vehicle from moving in a straight line when the driver is attempting to steer the vehicle straight. As I mentioned in previous posts, I have driven literally thousands of vehicles in the last 20 years as I was a valet for over a decade, IMHO, my '05 CRV torque steer that causes the vehicle to go right upon acceleration is far beyond any vehicle I have ever driven. However, I have not driven the Ford SHO referred to by others on this Board (that supposedly had the same unwelcomed response upon acceleration). Steve

varmint · April 2005

"I still do not understand why a vehicle that has "excessive torque steer by design" is not a problem."

There are a few cars which have suffered from excessive torque steer by design. The V6 Altima and, to a lesser extent, the Acura TL with the manual transmission are two good examples. There is no reason why the CR-V should be added to the list of cars with that problem. When excessive torque steer is a problem, it is mentioned in magazine reviews, it shows up in owner surveys, and owners complain about it.

None of that has happened with the CR-V. The only owner complaints of "torque steer" are coming from a very small group of people. It is not a universal issue. There is nothing to suggest that the problem is designed into the vehicle.

If you are experiencing excessive torque steer, you have a problem. No one is debating that. Take it to a mechanic and work with them to get it fixed. However, just because you have a problem does not mean that problem was engineered into every CR-V.

Now, if you have a problem with PTTR (a pull, which happens regardless of throttle position), You still have a problem which is not engineered into the vehicle, rather it is a problem for which the CR-V seems to be prone. It has been resolved via a number of methods, but it can be corrected.

Figure out which problem you've got and get it fixed.

ateixeira · April 2005

tall enough to take a blow from the big boys without being over-ridden

Crash test scores are Good for CR-V models with side air bags, but the Subaru Forester is lower and gets better crash test scores from IIHS.

Here is the press release:

http://www.iihs.org/news_releases/2004/pr121004.htm

So I disagree that height is what helps them "take a blow". It's actually the air bags that make the (dramatic) difference, not the ride height.

-juice

varmint · April 2005

I think he's talking about frontal crashes where bumper compatibility is a problem, not the side impacts.

Neither the NHTSA nor IIHS use car-shaped barriers for their frontal impacts. Although both institutions have expressed concerns regarding bumper compatibility, they have not yet developed any kind of testing in that area.

With their most recent crash facilities, Honda makes a big deal about their testing (they drive Pilots into Civics). So, the manufacturers are doing something. I'm certain Honda is not the only one. But the data from those tests are not available to the public, and would not correlate with anything for other vehicles anyway.

kyfdx · April 2005

I think he meant from in front or behind... Over-ridden, meaning one bumper over-rides the other one...

Side airbags seem to be the number one predictor of crash safety in a side collision..

regards,
kyfdx

EDIT... what varmint says... beat me to it..

ateixeira · April 2005

The new side-impact tests for IIHS have tall bumpers meant to simulate a pickup truck or SUV slamming into the side.

You're right in that it's the only industry test (so far) that actually measures protection from tall trucks. But that's the only data we have, we shouldn't ignore it.

And in that test, taller vehicles didn't do any better, actually it looks like ride height really had no correlation to overall scores.

Air bags did.

-juice

varmint · April 2005

... anyone saying that ride height did have anything to do with side impacts. :confuse:

I don't mean to diminish the IIHS attempt at testing, or the performance of these vehicles, but, since we're not talking about side impacts, I don't see the relevance of side impact data.

stevedebi · April 2005

"I live in Dallas, Texas and going to buy a CRV this month. Is AWD necessary or worth it or is FWD all you need. Just seems like something else to use gas and break."

The last time I went through Dallas, a 'norther blew in, and it got dark and REALLY wet. AWD would have been useful.

Since it is only part time AWD, I would go for it, especially if you want the sunroof, 6 cd changer, alloy wheels, etc. The effect on MPG is very small.

Not to mention good for heading down to the tank for some fishing. Or just good 'ole East Texas clay county roads.

missourigrl · April 2005

hello. I have a 99 camaro and I've been looking around for a new vehicle. I love my car, but I want something that is safer, gets better gas mileage, sits up higher, roomier, more comfortable, and is an automatic. I found the 2005 CR-V and love the look, price, safetey, etc. I have not yet test driven one. There is no Honda dealership in my town and I haven't yet made it out of town to test drive one. The only thing I'm not sure about is the 4-cylinder engine. I know going from a camaro to a CR-V will be a huge change, but how is the 4-cylinder engine? Is it peppy? Can it pull a hill? Has anyone else here made such a drastic switch in vehicles?

Thanks!
Kristen

rhodyv · April 2005

Check out reviews here and elsewhere to get some sense.
This vehicle is NOT going to go uphill like a Camaro, and you'll kill the poor sucker if you try! BUT, in comparison to the Civic I just had which is also 4 cylinder and similar HP, it is a fair bit better. Certainly, once you get to speed in a CRV it feels quite "peppy" for a 4-cyl. I've been in V-6's that are not a whole lot better.

Do a good long test-drive if the dealer will allow (or borrow/rent one if you can)

ateixeira · April 2005

I'm talking about overall safety, and its (lack of) correlation to ride height.

The tall throne might give a feeling of invincibility, but that's not necessarily the case.

-juice

varmint · April 2005

The only way to answer that is to take a test drive. Everybody's idea of "peppy" is different. The CR-V's 4 cyl is certainly peppy when compared with the other four cyls on the market, but not when compared with a Camaro.

FWIW, my wife drives a 2001 Acura TL with the 225 hp V6. We switch cars all the time. I definitely have a different driving style when in her car. However, given that my CR-V is a 1999 model with a 5MT, that's not surprising.

ateixeira · April 2005

There's more horsepower than the original Ford Explorer, and it's lighter. Also compared to the early car-based SUVs, which had around 120hp; 160hp is adequate.

-juice

stevedebi · April 2005

The car is very peppy, and if you rev it up it will pull all day long. The only issue with the vehicle (not sure of the 2005, mine is a 2003 with a different transmission), is that from 50-70 MPH you have to either downshift manually or floor the gas to get passing speed. The CR-V appears to be geared for good MPG at these speeds, and is a bit reluctant to downshift. Turning off the overdrive will also do the trick. That is the only thing that you might notice in normal driving. It won't pull like the Camero, but it has a lot of pep.

steve royal · April 2005

varmint,

You wrote: "Figure out which problem you've got and get it fixed."

Ah...if it were that simple...The problem is my '05 CRV is under warranty and the Honda dealer techs told me not to bring the vehicle back in because they cannot fix the problem that they eventually identified as 'pulling to the right.' The Honda Dealer repair manager told me my only recourse is to conact the Manufacturer since they cannot fix it. The Manufacturer insists that the torque steer is "designed into the vehicle" and, therefore, was "engineered into every CR-V." Hence, Honda Manufacturer has no intention of fixing the 'problem.' I am not saying the torque steer is engineered into every vehicle. The Honda Manufacturer disputes your (and my) position. I agree with you, according to these Boards, not everyone is experiencing excessive torque steer...but those that do are not too happy about it due to the runaround the Honda dealer and Manufacturer are putting us through. From what I have read, no one had the problem rectified completely.

Since the dealer has not fixed the problem on three attempts and the Manufacturer's position is that no problem exists since the excessive torque steer is engineered into the '05 CRV, if I have an independent mechanic change parts that have to do with the steering, they will not reimburse me. This is why I have no alternative but to seek a legal means to resolve the problem since Honda is responsible to correctly analyze and completely remedy any problem with a new vehicle under warranty in this state. Steve

bshel · April 2005

Steve, sounds like you are going to pursue the Lemon Law on your suv. Sorry to hear you've had such a time with a dealer. keep us posted on progress with your situation.

kurtnew · April 2005

Hi,

Does anyone know if Honda plans to come out with a V6 version of the CR-V anytime soon? We live in a hilly area and are wondering how well this would perform here.

Thanks.

blueiedgod · April 2005

Hi,

Does anyone know if Honda plans to come out with a V6 version of the CR-V anytime soon? We live in a hilly area and are wondering how well this would perform here.

Thanks.

Probably not. Have you driven the CR-V? If you worry about power get one with manual, goes 0-60 in sub 8 seconds. Which is not bad by SUV standards. Otherwise get a Pilot.

Diesel may be coming in 2007 redesign.

ateixeira · April 2005

Does anyone know if Honda plans to come out with a V6 version of the CR-V anytime soon?

If they do it'll be called the Acura RD-X.

-juice

varmint · April 2005

Never said it would be easy.

My first suggestion would be to make sure you have everything documented. Find an alternative dealer where you can take the car and have them check it out. Document that.

Lemon laws vary from state to state, but in most cases the dealer has three attempts to fix something before the lemon law may be invoked. Of course, those attempts need to be documented.

Unless your alternate dealer somehow fixes the problem, pursue a legal option. A poster here at Edmunds by the name of Driftracer actually deals in lemon-law cases on a regular basis. He might be willing to point you toward some helpful resources.

And, FWIW, your's is the only case of excessive torque steer I have ever read about. Others have reported many complaints of PTTR, but, as has been discussed ad nauseum, that's a different problem. PTTR is also very difficult to correct as there appears to be many factors which can result in that symptom. But you're chasing down the wrong rabbit if you think your problem is related to PTTR.

stever · April 2005

Close - it's Driftracer. Try the Any Questions for a Car Dealer? for the dealer perspective.

Steve, Host

varmint · April 2005

D'oh! Typo on my behalf. I went back and corrected it. Thanks!

stever · April 2005

I think the draft racers are mostly cyclists. :-) In any event, you should be able to find Drift in the discussion I linked.

Steve, Host

varmint · April 2005

I can see it now... two architects working their pencils across a blueprint in an epic showdown...

kyfdx · April 2005

Actually, I think Darft is the new Pope's hometown...

(fun with typos)

stever · April 2005

Whew, I was afraid a Cad pun was coming instead, but this isn't a GM topic. Then there are the street clowns, aka daftracers.

Steve, Host

ateixeira · April 2005

Careful using the term :lemon: , the definition is very specific and limiting:

http://autopedia.com/html/HotLinks_Lemon2.html

-juice

kyfdx · April 2005

Interesting.. In KY, you have to have purchased the car here and be a resident... Something I've never done.. The Ohio version doesn't say anything about having to be a resident, though.. that is where I buy most of my cars.

steve royal · April 2005

Thanks Varmint,
Already had 2 different Honda dealers (for a total of 3 times) look at it and document what they did (or did not do) and 1 independent mechanic look at it.

I don't believe this is the only case of excessive torque steer that you have read. Hawaii CRV posted on this Board and described the torque steer but also labelled the problem PTTR. She recently had a Lemon Law arbitration but we have not heard anything from her recently. Additionally, if you go to the NHTSA website, some of the PTTR described appears to actually be "torque steer." Once again, thanks for your input. Steve

motordavid · April 2005

V.doubtful on V6 anytime in near future. As for perfomance in a "hilly area",
don't know where you are, but our CR-V operates in the Smoky Mtns area of far western NC at altitudes up to 6000 ft elev. w/ lots of climbs and descents. It is ok, performance-wise,imo: climbs ok, but for any effort in not shooting mpg in the head, you must draw a fine line, throttle foot-wise, between keeping forward "oomph" and holding the tach under 4K or better yet, <3K.

The less than satisfying part is the extreme tire wear and brake pad wear I've exp'd and posted about. Much of this premature wear is due,imo, to the very curvy and steep descents we make down our mtn and in general driving in the area combined with the brake design capabilities and front suspension. (Non orig tires and bigger wheels&tires provided lil' relief.)

The motor will pull fine, (though we don't tow or drive often with car "loaded"), but one will need RPMs to pull long, steep ascents and the tire/brake wear is nearly absurd compared to current and all former vehicle experiences. It gets around, and Up&Down,
just not with out some huffing. Some owners here are near fawning in their regard for their cars; I have never benenamored of the CR-V. GL,md

bhitchcock · April 2005

I know you can fold the back seats forward to increase the storage area in the back, but has anyone removed them from the vehicle? Is it a quick process with no tools required??

307web · April 2005

No, that is a minivan feature and it is not a minivan.

varmint · April 2005

It can be done, but not without tools. Read: Not designed for it.

307web - I respectfully disagree. There are several SUVs which removable rear seats. The RAV4 is the first to come to mind. Of course, the RAV has such a small interior, you really need to remove those seats, but it's not just a minivan thing.

ateixeira · April 2005

Has removeable seats.

-juice

2001 - 2006 Honda CR-Vs

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles