By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
I once was driving on Rock Creek Drive, in DC/MD, and the creek had flowed over and flooded some of the road. You could not even see where the curbs where, no street lines, nothing. Who knows how deep that was.
I did a U-turn and avoided the area entirely. I was in my Miata, which has about zero ground clearance, but I don't think I would have tried that even in my Forester.
-juice
That would have been me. I'll see if I can get the video reposted on-line.
And, yes, what I did was very risky. The water was more or less level with the floorboards and moving briskly. I was more concerned with splashing water into the air intake more than quick-cooling the engine block. But either event could spell big trouble in a little Honda.
-juice
Do you drive/own a CR-V too? We've been shopping for something perfect for my wife. I was pushing hard for the Tribeca, but she finds too many "sight" problems (front pillars, small back window, etc.) She's kind of settled on the CRV, so I'm wondering what you think.
Thanks,
jdr
front muds, cargo tray, cargo cover, moon roof visor.
congrats on your new V.
We shopped the Forester too. Not enough back seat space, no side curtain air bags, no traction control.
I think we ran out of things to argue about. I'm sure he'll disagree. LOL
I had a press fleet Tribeca for 4 days, and really liked it. It's big and not well suited to city driving, to be honest (16 mpg), but it was great for a road trip we took. Good suburbs/trip car (25 mpg).
Visibility is an issue. They need a backup camera option. Some owners install their own sonar device, they say that helps somewhat.
If you can get over that, the interior is a dream, the DVD screen for the kids is massive (9", same as the Ody and bigger than the MDX), the NAV screen is also massive (7"), the seats split 40/20/40, they're heated, the mirrors are heated, AWD is biased to the rear (45/55). It has everything you need in the snow.
The CR-V is boxy and practical, but feels more basic than a Tribeca. Then again, so does the Forester, which is closer in price to the CR-V. Tribeca is closer to the MDX in my opinion, just a tad smaller.
So Subaru takes a smaller, sportier approach in both segments. Question is, is the driving experience more important to you than the interior space? If not, you'll be happier with the CR-V or even a Pilot.
-juice
http://automobiles.honda.com/element/index.aspx
Play the game, it's pretty hilarious.
-juice
This is on the new Blogs section in Edmunds. Pretty neat, eh? And aftermarket means it's basically universal. So use it on a Tribeca or a CR-V (that spare blocks the view partially).
-juice
With 75 miles on the odometer, I must say, I'm very impressed!
I got the dealer to throw in the rubber mats and cargo floor pad, and front mud flaps.
I find the driver ergonomics very comfortable.
I like the way it handles, particularily on curves. Plenty of power for my needs.
No sign of the dreaded PTTR
And, its PRETTY!!
Tell me, whats the deal with the non-retractable antenna? Is that going to be a problem in the car wash?
You should be able to unscrew the antenna for going through the car wash.
Steve, Host
Only if you leave it on. Take the time to remove with when going through car washes.
Also, when was the last time anyone had a retractable antenna??
Not sure why people tell others to remove it when the manufacturer doesn't recommend it.
I imagine it won't do any harm but it is not necessary. Ever seen how the antenna bends when you're driving 55+ mph? It can handle a car wash. YMMV
Nowadays they should be integrated in the glass, totally seamless.
-juice
That's so 90's though.
As for removing it, it couldn't hurt. It's been at least 10 years since I've driven through a car wash. I recall there being plenty of moving machinery in there that could damage an aerial.
The first gen CR-V had a one-piece (non-telescopic) antenna which retracted into the A pillar. :P
Juice mentioned in-glass antennas, but I'm told the reception with these can be somewhat sketchy. The short, stubby antennas used on many european cars are better. Though, it shouldn't be mounted in the middle of the roof (like my MDX) as they get in the way of things placed on the roof rack.
-juice
Unfortunately, she sees to many blind spots and limited sight areas for her taste. (Front pillars, rear window to small) Since I will only get to drive it on some weekends and maybe 2x a year on vacation we're probably going to settle on the CR-V--a vehicle with all the safety features we're looking for and better visibility(in her estimation).
I have relied heavily on posters over at the Tribeca forum and am over here to make sure I get the right CR-V.
Thanks for the input.
jdr
Not trying to turn you away from the CR-V (I loved mine), but there are other alternatives.
Large metal bumpers are a thing of the past. Most of the "bumpers" you see on modern vehicles are plastic. Crumple zones are much better at protecting the occupants of the vehicle by absorbing the energy of a crash. Yes, it tends to do more damage to vehicle. But it does less damage to the occupants.
JM2C
In this case size does not matter. Unless of course you don't like the way it looks, which is not the same as the CR-V being an unsafe vehicle because of a small plastic bumper cover.
JM2C
I have integrated antenna on my '01 Galant, never had a problem, really miss that feature on the CR-V. But I guess it varies with manufacturer. The other thing I miss a lot on the CR-V is the 30 sec power memory and intermittent wiper speed. Hopefully Honda will include at least the last one in the next years.
George
It just doesn't sound right.
Regarding rear-end collisions, aren't they supposed to be developing new rear-impact standards soon? I wonder if there will be tests to go along with it.
I'm not so concerned about the CR-V offering protection, but rather the cost of fixing a 5mph impact when the spare causes damage to the rear glass and hatch.
There was a poster on this very thread that spent $1500 when his daugther (IIRC) had a low-speed accident backing into something.
-juice
Now, according the IIHS tests, the CR-V is very expensive to fix in rear collisions. They're testing with poles and walls. It's a valid test, but they're thinking about parking lot accidents with stationary objects not situations when you get hit by a vehicle.
Basically the RAV4, CR-V, and Forester get aces in all the tests.
IIHS only evaluates the head restraints for rear-end collisions, probably because whiplash is the most common injury. Again, all 3 do well here, with the Forester going a step further with active head restraints.
So they're not evaluating the safety structure in a rear-end collision, at least not yet. The bumper basher is only looking at the expense of repairing a fender bender.
-juice
Apparently the way the Honda compressor fails (perhaps "explodes" is more descriptive) it distributes debris through out the entire A/C system, so that it's significantly more than just a compressor replacement.
IIHS Frontal: Best Pick vs. Average
IIHS Side: Good vs. Poor (Good only with optional SA)
IIHS Head Restraing: Good vs. Good/Average (depends on model)
Escape fares better in the bumper basher but I think everyone can agree these safety tests are far more important.
-juice
Yep I'm aware that high cost to repair could drive up the cost to insure the vehicle etc.
My motto: Have insurance (I'm pretty sure it's law in most States) and then you won't care about what it costs to fix.
$500 deductible, but then when we had a claim our insurance rates went up by $300 per year for the next 3 years. That's how long insurance takes to remove the dreaded "C" from your policy.
So the overall "cost" of a claim would be about $1400, i.e. hardly worth it.
Insurance is not really ideal for minor fender benders. YMMV.
-juice
A lot of these incidents have been covered for most of the cost by Honda American, after the warranty had run out. You have to call the HA people, not the local dealer.
George
George, I assume you know how to read since you read those posts. You would have seen that Honda has covered all or partial costs, depending on the mileage. But you have to be pro-active and call Honda America on your own and open a case. How hard can it be to call the number on the back of the owner's manual?
(exploding compressors with lots of costly damage)
They were having problems getting Honda to acknowledge a problem and most were dissatisfied with Honda's lack of response. My question was, has any other V owners had similar problems and if so, is it unique to the 2003? I was the owner of a 2000 and now a 2004 and was wondering if there is something I should be concerned about.
Thanks for the input. That is exactly the info. I was looking for. I am wondering if those failures are in very hot climates or is it happening in various climate areas?
Honda seems prone to closing their eyes on many problems. I find it interesting that we never or seldom see these things show up on the annual Consumer Report auto stats. Hundreds of Transmissions have failed, sometimes multi times but never seem to show up on any reliability reports. Thanks again.
George
Sorry George, but I just don't think that one is true. You mentioned transmissions as an example. However, when I look up my own 2001 TL at CR, the 2000, 2001, and 2002 models all have lower marks for the tranny than other years. Same with the Accord.
Honda never advertises their problems, that's true enough. But they stepped up to the plate for those affected by the tranny issue. Owners were given an extended warranty. When there was a problem with the 2002 CR-V's seat belts, they literally repo'd people cars to get them fixed. They wouldn't risk letting the owner drive the car back to the dealer.
Step back and take a look at what other manufacturers have done when problems arise. I think you'll find that Honda is no less active in getting things done.
I was on AMEX at the time, I believe, through the Costco Executive Program. They're a low-risk pool, so maybe we got bumped out after that one claim? :confuse:
-juice
The 2005 report showed no weakness on '99 Odyssey Trans. but the current report shows poor ratings. Slow to catch up, I guess.
I have driven nothing but Hondas since 1984 and try to keep abreast of the weaknesses. I have a friend in AL that had 4 transmissions replaced on his Odyssey. Honda took no responsibility after the first replacement. He had to finally dispose of it with less than 60k miles because he couldn't afford to be without it when being repaired and the constant cost to replace. You couldn't GIVE him another Honda. I'm not a Honda basher but I do think a manufacturer should stand behind a car when there is an obvious weakness in their manufacturing or engineering.
Last year my family purchased 5 new autos. Two CR-V's, one Element, One Pilot and a Subaru Baja. I would like to know when we are buying a potential problem. Doesn't that make sense?
Thanks for the response and your insight.
George