Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

2001 - 2006 Honda CR-Vs

1…303304306308309…314

Comments

  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    The new RAV4 is slightly smaller than the current CR-V (2002-2006). But it's probably about the same as the first generation CR-V (1996-2001).

    Honestly, I found that the Highlander's front seats "seemed" less roomy than the current CR-V. Something about the spot where the side windows meet the roof being too close to my head. I was wearing a ball cap the day I drove it and turning head resulting in the cap's visor contacting the window.
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    If I open the drivers door immediately after pressing the unlock on the key I hear a beep noise like I've left the lights on.

    It's because your lights flash when you use the remote - your lights are still energized when you open the door.

    It happens on my Odyssey as well.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    RAV4 has a gem of a V6, Consumer Reports just managed 22 mpg on regular fuel (same as their last CR-V) with 0-60 in a different league. If you can splurge for that engine...

    The I4 was 6 tenths ahead of their CR-V and managed 2 mpg better as well. They also rated it best in class, so maybe there is something to all the hype. ;)

    Forester is another option, it split the different between those two, quicker and more efficient than the CR-V, but it could not quite match the RAV4 2.4l. They have not tested a Forester turbo.

    I test drove a Freestyle this weekend. The wife got a $50 offer from Eddie Bauer if we test drove an Expedition, but we asked to drive a Freebie instead.

    They're cavernous. Adults actually fit in the 3rd row. And 20/27 from a V6 (FWD though) ain't bad. The one we drove was $32k and lacked a moonroof and GPS NAV, but had a DVD and leather.

    But...fit and finish are well behind the CR-V and RAV4. The door panels were loose on both sides, just poor fitment. There were sharp edges on the mold parts, exposed screw heads on the doors, stuff like that. You may or may not care about those.

    The drive? It's heavy, so the V6 struggles to get it moving. Once going it's OK, nothing special. There is a lot of body roll, pitch and dive. We had 2 kids with us and my 3 year old son kept saying "Bouncy, Daddy!". He was in the 2nd row.

    To be honest I would not mind renting one for a week, to have all that space for the kids and gear on a trip. But a van does everything better. We had a loaner Freestar van last year and my wife and I both agreed we liked it better.

    Consider a used one - they depreciate rather quickly so that could be a bargain.

    -juice
  • jwb18tjwb18t Member Posts: 45
    Thank for the responses. My wife mentioned the Subaru Tribeca also today. I have rented one and drove approx 600 miles, liked it and it has the 3rd row seat in emergency. Meant to say in the original message that we are considering a Honda Van also. I know that is quite a range of vehicles but it is where we are right at the moment.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Good luck shopping around, that's the fun part.

    I just found out the Toyota dealer on 355 in MD will rent any of those, so we might rent an AWD Sienna for our next trip to CT, probably this fall.

    Renting is a very good way to evaluate a vehicle, you really can see if you can live with it. :shades:

    -juice
  • lirlir Member Posts: 81
    I remember reading the specs on both the CRV and RAV4, and the RAV4 was slightly bigger. In any event, in driving both (SE and Ltd.), it seemed that the RAV was roomier and interiors were nicer. The nice thing about the 2007 CRV will be the spare tire tucked away. In terms of the look of it, I wasn't blown away (if those spy pics are correct). I saw though that it was going to be shorter, lower but wider. In that case, i'd prefer the 2006.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Here are the numbers. Most measurements are within a ½ inch. The only ones more than a full inch favor the CR-V.

    Front seat head (w/moonroof): +.6" RAV4
    Rear seat head: +.6" RAV4
    Front seat shoulder: +.2" RAV4
    Rear seat shoulder: +1.2" CR-V
    Front seat hip: +.7" CR-V
    Rear seat hip: +1.1" CR-V
    Front leg: +.5" RAV4
    Rear leg: +1.1" CR-V

    Of course, these are just linear measurements and they do not tell the whole story.

    I do think the interior of the new RAV4 is nicer. It's not premium grade, but it's more up to date than the current CR-V. The CR-V is getting old.
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Member Posts: 2,798
    If I open the drivers door immediately after pressing the unlock on the key I hear a beep noise like I've left the lights on.

    It's because your lights flash when you use the remote - your lights are still energized when you open the door.

    It happens on my Odyssey as well.

    Because the car "thinks" you left the lights on as they flash.
  • phisherphisher Member Posts: 175
    If its like the 06 CRV I'm pretty sure that you can place the spare in the back under the table in the floor. The space looks like its for a full size tire not a donut.
  • stevedebistevedebi Member Posts: 4,098
    "The space looks like its for a full size tire not a donut."

    Give it a try and let us know. I'm betting a full size won't fit.
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    I know that is quite a range of vehicles but it is where we are right at the moment.

    We are shopping in the same general space. We were originally going to get an Odyssey, but in moving up from an earlier Villager the Ody is just too big for my wife. We looked at the RAV4, wife didn't like it. We don't like the current CRV for the cheesy dash, but love the general layout, economy, and size. We're going to be driving the kids quite a distance, daily, to a new school next year and want something pretty efficient. Wife doesn't like sedans so Civic, etc. are out.

    The other car we found that has similar/slightly more room than the CRV is the Mazda 5. A lot of people don't know about it, but it is based on the Mazda 3 but is really a mini-minivan. It has 3 rows and sliding doors in the rear. It's also a bargain from a price perspective. We came away MUCH more impressed than we expected to be, and we've heard the same comments from others who looked at it as well.

    So we're probably down to either the Mazda 5 or the CR-V redesign. We're going to wait for the '07 models of each and then decide.
  • smith1smith1 Member Posts: 283
    The Mazda5 is a really nice vehicle. It reminds me of an oversized Toyota Matrix (except for the sliding doors). The 6 passenger seating is nice for flexibility, but as a large guy I found the seating in the front and middle to be noticeably less roomy than the current CR-V.

    Funny thing is, from the "spy shots" it seems like the next CR-V will look less like a small SUV and more like a microvan/crossover vehicle, like the Mazda 5 -- except again, it won't have the sliding doors.

    One thing I found a bit disappointing in the Mazda5, as with all Mazdas, is the fuel economy. The EPA highway rating of 27 mpg is worse than the 244-hp V6 Odyssey.
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    "One thing I found a bit disappointing in the Mazda5, as with all Mazdas, is the fuel economy. The EPA highway rating of 27 mpg is worse than the 244-hp V6 Odyssey."

    I agree with you on the mileage. We are hoping the 2007 Mazda 5 has a 5speed auto rather than the 4speed currently.

    The current EPA mileage tests are not very good. The highway mileage test is done at fairly low speed with AC off. The result is that larger, high wind resistance vehicles to disproportionately better than reality. Consumer's Reports pointed out that the Ody is one of the worst offenders (it gets much worse actual mileage relative to the EPA numbers).

    While I've read posts of both CRV and Mazda 5 owners seeing over 30 mpg on the highway, I've never seen this about an Ody. Some posters have said their Ody city mileage has been as low as 18 mpg. So I don't believe the Ody figures are going to be nearly that high in real life.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I agree, the Mazda5 tends to do better than EPA numbers, one of the few cars to do so. CR said S2000 was another.

    Autoweek had a head-to-head with the HHR, and it picked the Mazda5. Not only that, but it got better average mileage, and you know they were pushing it because the HHR was slightly quicker.

    Interestingly, the HHR has better EPA numbers.

    -juice
  • clackerclacker Member Posts: 1
    My 2006 is 3 months old and I hear a clack sound in the rear when I take off. Only happens when I pull out of garage and make two right turns in alley to get to street. When I start to speed up in street there is one clack sound. That is the only time I hear it. When I went in to Honda dealer for an oil change I mentioned it and the service advisor had never heard of it. My first impression is that it is a normal sound made by Honda CRV's, but when the service advisor said he had never heard of it I began to worry that it might not be something experienced by other CRV's. Anyone have any idea what it is?
  • blackexv6blackexv6 Member Posts: 503
    Sounds like the ABS self test. Nothing to worry about. I think there is a Honda Tech Service Bulletin (TSB) instructing dealers how to duplicate the sound for customers while parked. Many people complain/have questions about this noise.
  • phisherphisher Member Posts: 175
    The full size does fit for the diameter but the height of the spare is to high to put the table back in top. Perhaps the 2007 will fix this problem as it would only take a few inches to solve.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I bet they go to a donut.

    Sadly, that's par for the class. I think the RDX got one.

    -juice
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Yep. I expect Juice is right. The spare will likely be a donut, which (IMHO) stinks on many levels since the compartment probably will not fit a full-size spare even if the customer wanted to purchase one.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Maybe the '07 will have run-flats. :P

    I'm sure lots of people like their run-flats, but I haven't seen anyone rushing to create an "I Love My RunFlats" discussion.

    Steve, Host
  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 236,777
    You think? I think not... ;)

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Early on in the Ody threads that was a major point of debate. Are people still complaining a lot about those? What about them? Stiff ride, high replacement cost, or what?

    Just curious.

    -juice
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    I haven't following the discussion in Vans, but the BMW run-flats have garnered some derisive comments. Those who like them or haven't noticed any issues may not be posting though.

    Run Flat Tires - '06 BMW 3-Series - Opinions/Experiences

    In addition to the handling and replacement cost you mentioned, availability also seems to be an issue.

    Steve, Host
  • stevedebistevedebi Member Posts: 4,098
    "I bet they go to a donut.

    Sadly, that's par for the class. I think the RDX got one. "

    Wouldn't that cause the RT4WD to run all the time when the spare is mounted?
  • blueiedgodblueiedgod Member Posts: 2,798
    "I bet they go to a donut.

    Sadly, that's par for the class. I think the RDX got one. "

    Wouldn't that cause the RT4WD to run all the time when the spare is mounted?

    The doughnut could have the same circumference, but be narrow to fit under the table.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Correct. In fact, that is exactly what is done with the Element.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    http://blogs.edmunds.com/Straightline/1107

    Worst CR-V Ever.
    image
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Worst CR-V Ever.

    For a moment there I thought Tidester had reopened the CR-V vs Escape discussion while I was asleep. :shades:

    Steve, Host
  • tidestertidester Member Posts: 10,059
    I didn't realize that "spy shot" meant a picture of the spy! It is a convincing cover though! ;)

    tidester, host
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Well, what are ya doin' asleep!?!?
  • drive62drive62 Member Posts: 637
    I forecast a loss of 55% of their sales in the US.

    Wish I could find all the comments made when the 2G 'V was set to debut. Many of them were negative as well. Didn't seem to hurt it's sales. The 7G Accord's styling wasn't so well received either, and I don't think it's sales dropped by more than 50%. Time will tell but I think that statement won't come true.
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    I saw that yesterday at TOV.

    Looks like the underbite is reality.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Name one entry level SUV with less than 65 cu. ft. of cargo space that has averaged more than 70K sales per year.

    When the first gen CR-V hit the scene, people bought 'em like hotcakes. The same buyers did not respond as well to the Forester and RAV4 despite both of them having roughly the same good quality, better handling, better fuel economy, and, in the case of the Subaru, more power.

    Why did the CR-V sell so much better? Good cargo and passenger space. The CR-V also had an advantage in looks over the Soob.

    The only vehicles to match the CR-V's sales pace have also had good cargo and passenger space. (Escape, Equinox, and new RAV4 plus a few others.)

    The 2nd gen CR-V continued with the same formula.

    This third generation CR-V seems to have stolen the formula from the Forester and old RAV4, which we've already seen is a bad idea if you want to sell more than 70K vehicles each year.

    Now, in addition to lacking good cargo capacity, this new CR-V is "controversial-looking". (Varmint's way of not blaspheming when he describes it.) Name one controversial-looking small SUV which has broken 70K per year on average. Not the Aztek. Not the Element. Not the Forester.

    Too small. Too ugly. Two of the most insurmountable problems for a compact SUV in this market.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Still no clear look at the D-pillar.

    Not diggin' that under-bite, though. I had a dog like that, and she had a bad temperment. ;)

    In general I don't like this trend of more styling flair, less utility. I bet GatorGreg could not fit half as much sod in this one! :D

    -juice
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Was the Forester ever controversial looking? Bland, boxy sure, but controversial?

    -juice
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    The underbite... the baleen whale grille... the headlights mounted above the grille... the lumpy bumper...

    It's a shame the nose is so hideous, because the sides and back are fine.
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    Oh, c'mon. You remember all the comments about it looking too "wagony". Reviews that called it "frumpy". I think "dorky" was another adjective that got published.

    Truth be told, I prefer the look of the original Forester more than this CR-V. But that Forester was not well liked by the masses. Plenty of people liked it in spite of its looks, but not because of them.
  • lirlir Member Posts: 81
    That's one ugly CRV! I thought it was going to be bolder looking, but that's just ugly, not to mention small. Did I already say how ugly it is? :lemon:
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Well, what are ya doin' asleep!?!?

    If the spy shots are really such a nightmare, I won't be able to get my nap in today. :shades:

    Steve, Host
  • saabgirlsaabgirl Member Posts: 184
    IMHO an SUV is s'posed to be a box in front for the motor and a box in back for the people and their stuff. When stylists get away from this basic formula, they inevitably edge toward the motorized loaf of Sunbeam look and end up over in minivan territory. Looks like I'll be keeping my '05 CR-V for quite awhile. Maybe it's all personal preference, but that's mine.
  • wellresearchedwellresearched Member Posts: 63
    I see some familiar names. It's hard to believe but after reading/participating in this forum OVER FOUR YEARS AGO, I bought a 2002 CRV-LX. It will be 4 years old in August. I should receive a commission from Honda for all of the "selling" I have done for this vehicle since I've had it. It is a terrific vehicle.

    My "problem" is this. It appears from all of the literature that side air bags are an important safety device. Particularly in light of the bumper height on most pick ups and large SUV's. My CRV LX does not have side impact air bags. I figured that I would end up buying a new CRV in a year or so. This time including the air bags.

    I absolutely do NOT like the looks of the '07 at all. The side open tail gate is perfect for my garage...I don't want a clam shell.

    My V has a mere 38K miles on it. It has been garaged and babied and I bought it new sneakers at 19K.

    When I bought it I intended to keep it for at least a decade. Should I buy a '06 CRV in the next few months or is it unlikely that I would actually need the side airbag? Your thoughts please?
  • jwb18tjwb18t Member Posts: 45
    Thanks for the replies on earlier post. I Like the ODY...., she thinks it is too big and that we will tire of it quickly. Current CRV has relatively low milage for as many years we have had it...bought in 1997 has 108k. It has been a fantastic vehicle. Think we will wait and see redesigned CRV and Freestyle before we make a choice. She saw the Tribeca and thinks it might be the ticket. That mini rear seat is a must have for those few times we have an extra kid in the car. Anyone have an idea if the redesigned CRV will have the extra seat?(3rd row) Thx.
  • lirlir Member Posts: 81
    Check out the new RAV4 - it has a 3rd row. I have one, but no 3rd row.
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    Seats 6
    Similar hp to CR-V
    Based upon highly reliable Mazda 3
    Sliding doors
    More cargo than current or future CR-V w/rear row folded
    Better looking
    Same length
    Less expensive
    Available NAV
    Available leather/heated seats/HID ('07)

    No, I'm not associated with Mazda, just considering this vs. new CR-V for 2007.
  • smith1smith1 Member Posts: 283
    But, no AWD...

    As to "better looking," we have to see the new CR-V in the flesh before a fair comparison can be made, and even then this will be a subjective judgment.

    But you are correct, the Mazda5 is an interesting alternative.
  • happyhondahappyhonda Member Posts: 1
    We have a 2005 Honda Sport Auto, a top car but one thing will not tow more than 1200kg, we would like to get a caravan, We hope the new Honda Crv can tow more.

    Also another point is that has Honda made the right Decision to make the Honda Crv in America, Honda has biult a good Reputation making good car's comming from Japan, is all that going be lost.
  • stevea3stevea3 Member Posts: 2
    I am considering the purchase of a new, 2006 Honda CR-V SE and am puzzled by the lack of protection of the engine compartment from debris picked up by the front wheels. When I looked under the hood inside the engine compartment I could see the front wheels directly. There was no sheet metal or other shield that would deflect water, dirt, rocks or anything else the tires might pick up and sling at the engine. Is this normal? Did they just neglect to install a shield on this particular car? Or is the design such that a shielded wheel well is unnecessary?
  • mlauterbachmlauterbach Member Posts: 2
    I'm considering buying a 2006 4WD CR/V EX. I've heard that it "requires" 5W20 oil - my questions are:
    1) Is that accurate?
    2) Where the heck can you buy 5W20 (the dealer priced me out their oil and filter and it would be nearly $35/oil change just for the supplies!). And can you easily buy a filter from someplace besides honda?
    3) Does 5W20 really wear out your engine sooner?

    Last question - are people seeing good MPG with low-grade gasoline or do you need to use mid- or premium?

    Thanks!
  • joecarnutjoecarnut Member Posts: 215
    Especially if fuel economy is up.
    It appears much more aerodynamic although on VTEC they mention the weight goes up some. Its possible most of that room they supposedly cut down is on the room line. The spyshot of the white one looked smaller, but the other spyshot with the blue crv looks larger.
    Very disappointed with the rear bumper placement though.
    But hope some of the reports are true about it being a smoother ride.
    I actually think it looks somewhat cool and the hatchback is a positive point for me.
    But with gas prices the way they are, it seems a car in the 30+ mpg range is almost a guzzler these days. :confuse:
  • wheelz4wheelz4 Member Posts: 569
    I just find it odd that Honda seems to have completely changed the Cr-V's mission. If they wanted an awd/sport-hatch/Matrix-Vibe fighter, they should have created one, not canibalized the CR-V. Maybe they see their competition as Hyundai's Tuscon, not Toyota's Rav-4. I guess they'll have to do a spin on "less-is-more" for their ad campaign.
    As an aside....I finally had a chance to drive the new Rav-4 the other day (V6 Sport). I would say that the new Rav4 is pretty much the equal of the current CR-V in terms of space, though it doesn't have the mini-van-like walkthrough between the front seats. It was very solid, quiet and the V6 was incredibly smooth and effortless. With decent fuel economy from both the 4 and the 6 and a choice of 5 or 7 seats in a just-right-sized package, this seems to be the one to beat now in this segement. It's almost as if Honda is throwing in the towel in this segement, or maybe putting the CR-V into a different segement (small, sporty AWD hatch) with the new CR-V having less room, less power(w.r.t. weight), less ground clearance etc. Would it have been that hard for Honda to stay true to the original & 2nd gen CR-V's mission with the new RDX/CR-V platform than to just put out a less powerfull version of the RDX with a Honda badge?
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles