Audi's system is nice. The one achilles' heel of a torsen setup (no power shift under zero traction) is covered by the traction control. They're the best for the track; no wonder Touring Cars banned AWD.
One more situation where AWD is a big plus - pulling a trailer on a wet and slippery boat ramp. FWD gets very little traction and inevitably spins its wheels.
It was rather interesting to see a buddy of mine pull two jet skis on an aluminum trailer out of the water with a Prelude. Noisy and nasty.
So, CR-V intenders, get RT4WD if you own a jet ski. :-)
Torsen does shift power if there is slippage, and it does so very quickly since the gears detect this differential of speed immediately. The BTCC banned it because they through that it was an unfair advantage even with the additional weight that the cars were carrying. Tirewear was more even on the AWD Audis too.
Drew Host Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
I've owned a variety of RWD (Alfa, Triumph) FWD (Acura, Honda, Saab) and while they've all been unique, none of these cars have had a traction 'problem' on dry or wet roads - given good tires and a halfway sane/competent person behind the wheel. Snow and ice are a differnet story. I've done OK around town with FWD but I've found that real snow tires, at least on the front, are a must. All-seasons don't get it. Even so, going up to the local ski areas during a storm is out - the cops won't even let you try without AWD or chains. Hence my interest in something with at least part time AWD. I totally agree that drving on snow packed or icy roads should be treated as a purely defensive activity. There are plenty of morons around here who think AWD and ABS mean you can stop and corner normally, too. They bash into things (and people!) all winter long around here. I don't think, for me, the difference between part- and full-time AWD would be very meaningful, since I'm taking it easy anyway when there's snow and/or ice around, so I'll probably go with the Honda since I have a lot of faith in their products generally. I wonder how many of you living in snowy winter climates change over to winter tires on your AWD vehicles? Some around here do, I think most stay with all seasons.
Barnone - Not a stupid question. Yes, it does work in reverse.
Dill6 - We get our share of snow here in MA, but not enough to warrant snow tires. We get dumped on fairly regularly, but it doesn't stick for very long. Snow tires wear out too quickly in conditions like that. I've contemplated getting a set of steel rims to mount Blizzaks on. That would make changing them back and forth much easier, but it also increases the expense.
I'm in MA as well and got snows for the first time last year for our Ody. Although they plow quickly, it never seems to be during clear when commuting. Also, gives me peace of mind with the wife and kiddies out in the snow.
As for steel rims, they cost about $40 each for the Ody. Considering a mount and balance will run about $12-15/tire and doing it twice a year, that'll pay itself back in less than 2 years and will keep my pretty alloys out of the muck. My luck with Honda alloys is that they don't like salt and sand very much.
If you're going to switch over for winter I think getting an extra set of steel rims is the way to go - for all the reasons you mentioned plus these: repeated mounting/dismounting of tires risks tearing the bead, which ruins the tire. Also, if we're talking fairly wide stock rims, you're better off going a little narrower if you're going to encounter a lot of snow. My wife's Prelude has 215s (I think) on the orig. alloy wheels - we got her some narrower steel rims with 195 snows for winter and they work great. And Costco will switch the wheels over for you for NOTHING! Her car works fine around Salt Lake in the winter by the way, but it does wear 4, not 2, snows.
I was checking on my parents. My dad, 77, would go out and try to shovel in weather like that. I just want to make sure they were OK and didn't try to do anything dumb. The next day I loaded up a borrowed snow thrower and dug out their car and sidewalks. The still couldn't go anywhere since the rest of their street was still covered too much for their Mazda to get out.
FWIW, the little sloppy snow falls are the worst traction wise.
Robr - You may be able to get steelies for even less. Dealers will sometimes have left over steel rims from cars that have been upgraded to alloys. If someone buys an LX and gets a set of alloys for it, the dealer keeps the steel rims at the shop. After a while they pile up in the back. A member over at the CR-V IX has gotten sets for as little $6-10 per rim.
Dill6 - Good point about wear and tear from frequent swapping. I put a respectable 25-30K on the tires each year, so my rubber budget is as high as I'm willing to let it go. Since I've never had a problem with the CR-V, I don't consider the upgrade essential. Mind you, if someone where to offer me a free set...
Someone over at the CR-V IX just posted a long story about the death of his CR-V. He got smooshed between a Ford Super Duty and a GMC Sierra at near highway speed. By his description, his CR-V is totalled. The good news is he is alive and relatively unhurt. His account describes how well the passenger compartment held up.
No word on whether or not the spare tire survived.
varmit: no, no. Put snows on your 15" rims, and get a set of 16"s with some better rubber.
If you have two sets of rims, it's just a bolt-on change. 15 minutes. More if you're obsessive compulsive like me and you manually torque each one to 70 ft-lbs.
Also, I always carry a small bag of sand with me in winter. Though I'm more likely to use it to help someone else. :-)
Hey All, Am considering installing roof rack myself, but was wondering about a couple of things. The mounting points for the roof rack are inside 2 channels which run the length of the crv. Are these channels intended for water drainage? If not, would the rack and rubber trim pieces keep water out of the channels? If so, would the roof rack mounts block the water flow? Also, does anyone know whether the factory mounting studs are built in through the roof from the inside up through to the outside or are they tack welded on the exterior of the roof instead of through it? Would appreciate any knowledge you might have on the subject. Thanks. crv is 2001.
* Vehicle Stability Assist (VSA) is optional (automatic transmission only)
* NAVI, leather interior etc. is optional
All of these equipment have been available with the previous generation CR-V in Japan.
We get the JDM equivalent of the 'performa' model, with more cladding, and spare on the rear. The 'fullmark' model is cleaner looking (like the SE model with the current CR-V) and the spare is hidden.
I think EBD comes with all CRV ABS brake systems. Even the American CRV has it.
The Honda newsroom site under chasis section "Anti-lock brakes are standard equipment on the EX trim level. On the CR-V, ABS operates even when the 4-wheel drive system is operating. The system is a four-sensor, three-channel system with a speed sensor located at each wheel. When the driver applies maximum brake pressure and impending wheel lockup is detected, the sensors send a signal to an electronic control unit (ECU). The ECU processes the information, then tells the ABS system to momentarily disengage, then reapply brake pressure at the appropriate wheel(s). If impending wheel lockup occurs when brake pressure is reapplied, the cycle is repeated. This allows the tires to be maintained at the point of maximum traction. There is a separate channel for each front wheel and the rear wheels share a common third channel. This is a "select-low" system, meaning the system controls both rear-wheel slave cylinders together when it senses incipient wheel lockup in either wheel. "
That sounds like EBD to me. Even though no such word is used.
EBD will shift braking effort to the rear brakes (only when braking in a straight line) so as to promote more even wear of the front and rear brakes. The VSA model probably has a different, more sophisiticated, ABS system too, that is, 4 sensors, 4 channels.
Drew Host Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards k.
Yep, Drew. A little more torque for steel wheels (75 lb-ft).
Diploid's link clearly shows one of my pet peeves: the exposed rear gate hinge. At least there is only one instead of the two on the previous model, and the tire seems to hide it from most angles.
I really prefer the body-color grille surround. I wonder if the US will get an SE model like that.
3rd row seating sounds interesting. The article is a bit vague. They say it will "use the CR-V as a base model". Does that mean it might get a longer wheelbase? Or will they just add a seat? And if so, wouldn't a folding seat like the Odyssey be sweet?
The Isuzu Trooper is available with seating for 7 in other parts of the world. We have yet to see that feature over here. Is it because of safety reasons? Maybe people in Southeast Asia don't drive as fast as we do- therefore rearend collisions aren't as damaging?
is that the 3rd-row seats will split (50/50) and will fold up sideways, like that of the Land Cruiser, and previous Montero. That seems to be a popular solution, especially with Japanese brands.
They may may even face inward, like that of a subway, and that access will be through the rear door. Land Rover has used this arrangement.
Cause if the seat disappears into the floor like in the Odyssey, there would be no picnic table.
Unless, of course, that is the trade-off for having the 3rd row. I would personally like for the seats (if we even get them) to disappear into the floor. Having them on the side takes up cargo space when they're not in use.
Well the Suzuki XL-7 made it here, and people are buying it.
If the seats in the CR-V aren't as bad as they are in the Suzuki, I'd like to see it available as an option.
Fullmark- not only does the exposed hinge irritate me, but they didn't even bother fixing the rear window. Now you have a rear that doesn't have the spare, and yet the window tells you that there should be one there.
I think the Fullmark has a cleaner look to it, but at the same time, it seems empty without the spare (given the window treatment).
I just don't see the Fullmark's tailgate the same way as I do for an Escape or Santa Fe.
Uh, not really. Suzuki sold just 2103 in August. Even looking at it from the bright side, the only SUV it outsold was the Aztec (1940).
Around me they carry hefty discouts, with prices dipping into the teens. Too trucky, perhaps. GM will replace it with a car-based one sharing a platform with the Saturn Vue, IIRC.
Yeah, the 3rd seat in the XL7 is apparently for aliens with no legs. If you move the 2nd row forward there is some, but it's a real squeeze.
Thing is, I want a 3rd row seat, it just needs to be a more clever design than that. Perhaps the live axle rear compromised packaging, but Honda could pull it off.
Read somewhere half the old Cherokee were sold to gov't agencies Fed, state and local and companies as work trucks . Maybe Liberty is capturing that market again.
Those mini vans like stream are designed for Asians. Average about a foot shorter, 80 pounds lighter. No sense bringing them here.
No, don't kill 'em. Suzuki makes great mini-cars. Their Wagon R led Japanese sales charts for years.
Let Suzuki handle the mini segments, which GM has never done well. Then let Subaru handle small to mid-size cars and crossover vehicles and AWD systems. Finally, let Isuzu help with trucks and source diesel engines. An isuzu diesel has let GM increase their diesel market share 1000% (not a typo).
It's remarkable that Honda is largely independent these days. Though they do get help, including from Isuzu (diesels, again).
My wife and I are one of the 2103 people who bought an XL-7 in August. The third row seat is quite useable. I am 6'1" and I can sit back there quite comfortably. My knees do touch the seat in front, but are not jammed in there. I wouldn't want to travel for hours on end back there, but for around town, it's fine. They even recline back some. Tight is the jump seats in my Toyota Tacoma Xtra Cab, I truly can't even use those, although a baby seat fits fine. We considered the CRV until we drove one. What a slug! My wife thought her previous Corolla was quicker (and that's not saying much). The CRV was noisy and felt pushed to keep up with 70 mph traffic. The interior reminded us too much of a Civic. Of course, the great Honda reliability is a big plus, but for the money, we felt the XL-7 gave you a lot more vehicle for the same price (and some even less). The third row seat was not a big reason for us to buy, but a nice feature to have. Also the V6, real 4x4, towing capacity, and rear A/C all won us over. I'll be curious to see the '02 CRV and see what improvements have been made.
All CR-V's share the same basic cladding, though there are some differences for the Fullmark. On the Fullmark and D model, the cladding is simply painted. Based on whay I've read so far, it looks like the equipment levels for the Performa and Fullmark are about the same as they are for the 1st generation.
I expect that Honda will bring an SE model back to the states in a few years. First they'll sel as many as possible while the 02 model is still new. When it gets closer to the end of its run, they'll spice it up with the SE.
Diploid - I may be misreading your post, but the Fullmark has always had the same side hinged gate. There has never been a left gate on a CR-V.
The Stream is sold in most markets around the world, not just Asia, so I don't think it was designed "just for Asians"......as it's Civic-based, space inside is similar to Civics, CR-V's etc.(i.e. more roomy than they look from the outside...remember, American Honda Execs originally said no the the CR-V, dismissing it as too small, until they actually got a hold of one and sat in it). True, the third row is probably best left to kids, although British reviews have said adults fit quite well. Besides, how many Americans drive around with 7 fullsize adults in their minivans all the time. I would welcome the Stream over here (or a 7 seat CR-V) as there are times when I could use 7 seats (but most of the time, need only 3 or 4). Besides, you could always make your mother-in-law sit back there!
Steve: if you drove an automatic CR-V, I'm sure the new one will be noticeably faster (Honda says 3 seconds, we'll see). It puts out a lot more torque.
The XL7's 3rd seat is only really useful if you move the 2nd row forward. With the 2nd row all the way back, there is zero space for your feet.
Artdecho - Good point about the Stream and Asian markets. It's really just an economical MPV. These are just as popular in Europe as they are in Asia.
I'm a bit surprized that Honda would adapt the CR-V for seven seats when the Stream is already available. The Stream even comes with RT4WD. I doubt that the SUV image is a big deal down there, so all I can figure is that they need more cargo space than the Stream provides, or they need ground clearance to get over rutted roads.
Earlier someone mentioned that ABS works with RT4WD. That's close but not quite. RT4WD automatically disengages when the brakes are applied, so that the ABS can send braking power to the three channels. They can't work at the same time. In fact, most of the time RT4WD will disengage when you lift your foot off the gas.
varmit- You're not misreading- I was under the impression that the Fullmark always had a liftgate. You'd think without the weight of the spare there, a liftgate would be possible. Specious reasoning on my part.
7 seats- There have been times when I could use 7 seats, too. I think the reason why 7 seat is being made into the CR-V is because Honda wants to lure buyers away from Suzuki's XL-7. The 3rd row may not be very useful for most, but a 3rd row is still a 3rd row, and a very effective marketing ploy. Also, I doubt if the Stream will ever make it over here.
I'm just hoping the 'surprise' is still in the engine. It would be nice for Honda to say "Fooled you! Our 4-banger doesn't make 160hp, it makes 180!"
Comments
One more situation where AWD is a big plus - pulling a trailer on a wet and slippery boat ramp. FWD gets very little traction and inevitably spins its wheels.
It was rather interesting to see a buddy of mine pull two jet skis on an aluminum trailer out of the water with a Prelude. Noisy and nasty.
So, CR-V intenders, get RT4WD if you own a jet ski. :-)
-juice
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
does the RT4WD engage when the car is in reverse?
I've done OK around town with FWD but I've found that real snow tires, at least on the front, are a must. All-seasons don't get it. Even so, going up to the local ski areas during a storm is out - the cops won't even let you try without AWD or chains. Hence my interest in something with at least part time AWD.
I totally agree that drving on snow packed or icy roads should be treated as a purely defensive activity. There are plenty of morons around here who think AWD and ABS mean you can stop and corner normally, too. They bash into things (and people!) all winter long around here.
I don't think, for me, the difference between part- and full-time AWD would be very meaningful, since I'm taking it easy anyway when there's snow and/or ice around, so I'll probably go with the Honda since I have a lot of faith in their products generally.
I wonder how many of you living in snowy winter climates change over to winter tires on your AWD vehicles? Some around here do, I think most stay with all seasons.
Dill6 - We get our share of snow here in MA, but not enough to warrant snow tires. We get dumped on fairly regularly, but it doesn't stick for very long. Snow tires wear out too quickly in conditions like that. I've contemplated getting a set of steel rims to mount Blizzaks on. That would make changing them back and forth much easier, but it also increases the expense.
As for steel rims, they cost about $40 each for the Ody. Considering a mount and balance will run about $12-15/tire and doing it twice a year, that'll pay itself back in less than 2 years and will keep my pretty alloys out of the muck. My luck with Honda alloys is that they don't like salt and sand very much.
Good Luck
FWIW, the little sloppy snow falls are the worst traction wise.
FWD is not good for any towing.
Dill6 - Good point about wear and tear from frequent swapping. I put a respectable 25-30K on the tires each year, so my rubber budget is as high as I'm willing to let it go. Since I've never had a problem with the CR-V, I don't consider the upgrade essential. Mind you, if someone where to offer me a free set...
No word on whether or not the spare tire survived.
If you have two sets of rims, it's just a bolt-on change. 15 minutes. More if you're obsessive compulsive like me and you manually torque each one to 70 ft-lbs.
Also, I always carry a small bag of sand with me in winter. Though I'm more likely to use it to help someone else. :-)
-juice
Am considering installing roof rack myself, but was wondering about a couple of things. The mounting points for the roof rack are inside 2 channels which run the length of the crv. Are these channels intended for water drainage? If not, would the rack and rubber trim pieces keep water out of the channels? If so, would the roof rack mounts block the water flow? Also, does anyone know whether the factory mounting studs are built in through the roof from the inside up through to the outside or are they tack welded on the exterior of the roof instead of through it? Would appreciate any knowledge you might have on the subject. Thanks. crv is 2001.
Price for a Fullmark 4wd starts at 2.198 mil yen, that's about US$ 18786. Sounds kinda low, don't know if VSA , moonroof included.
http://www.honda.co.jp/manual/cr-v/2002/index.html#
owner's manual
top end is 2.878 mil yen. thats 24600 dollar. sale starts Sept 20 in Japan..
CR-V looks much better without the claddings.
Seems as if the Fullmark edition is not liftgated.
Notice that the top CR-V has body colored grab handles, and a hard spare cover. I'm assuming this is the EX.
* ABS is standard
* Electronic brake distribution (EBD) is optional
* Vehicle Stability Assist (VSA) is optional (automatic transmission only)
* NAVI, leather interior etc. is optional
All of these equipment have been available with the previous generation CR-V in Japan.
We get the JDM equivalent of the 'performa' model, with more cladding, and spare on the rear. The 'fullmark' model is cleaner looking (like the SE model with the current CR-V) and the spare is hidden.
The Honda newsroom site under chasis section "Anti-lock brakes are standard equipment on the EX trim level. On the CR-V, ABS operates even when the 4-wheel drive system is operating. The system is a four-sensor, three-channel system with a speed sensor located at each wheel. When the driver applies maximum brake pressure and impending wheel lockup is detected, the sensors send a signal to an electronic control unit (ECU). The ECU processes the information, then tells the ABS system to momentarily disengage, then reapply brake pressure at the appropriate wheel(s). If impending wheel lockup occurs when brake pressure is reapplied, the cycle is repeated. This allows the tires to be maintained at the point of maximum traction. There is a separate channel for each front wheel and the rear wheels share a common third channel. This is a "select-low" system, meaning the system controls both rear-wheel slave cylinders together when it senses incipient wheel lockup in either wheel. "
That sounds like EBD to me. Even though no such word is used.
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
k.
http://www.veh-tech.net/
Bob
Diploid's link clearly shows one of my pet peeves: the exposed rear gate hinge. At least there is only one instead of the two on the previous model, and the tire seems to hide it from most angles.
I really prefer the body-color grille surround. I wonder if the US will get an SE model like that.
3rd row seating sounds interesting. The article is a bit vague. They say it will "use the CR-V as a base model". Does that mean it might get a longer wheelbase? Or will they just add a seat? And if so, wouldn't a folding seat like the Odyssey be sweet?
-juice
They may may even face inward, like that of a subway, and that access will be through the rear door. Land Rover has used this arrangement.
Bob
Unless, of course, that is the trade-off for having the 3rd row. I would personally like for the seats (if we even get them) to disappear into the floor. Having them on the side takes up cargo space when they're not in use.
Americans demand more space and comfort, no doubt.
A 3rd row seat like that may as well stay in the JDM. No thanks.
-juice
If the seats in the CR-V aren't as bad as they are in the Suzuki, I'd like to see it available as an option.
Fullmark- not only does the exposed hinge irritate me, but they didn't even bother fixing the rear window. Now you have a rear that doesn't have the spare, and yet the window tells you that there should be one there.
I think the Fullmark has a cleaner look to it, but at the same time, it seems empty without the spare (given the window treatment).
I just don't see the Fullmark's tailgate the same way as I do for an Escape or Santa Fe.
Around me they carry hefty discouts, with prices dipping into the teens. Too trucky, perhaps. GM will replace it with a car-based one sharing a platform with the Saturn Vue, IIRC.
Yeah, the 3rd seat in the XL7 is apparently for aliens with no legs. If you move the 2nd row forward there is some, but it's a real squeeze.
Thing is, I want a 3rd row seat, it just needs to be a more clever design than that. Perhaps the live axle rear compromised packaging, but Honda could pull it off.
-juice
As Ive suspected several posts ago, if the Stream, which is based off the Civic, could carry a 3rd seat, there's no reason why the CR-V can't.
The only thing that keeps me from believing that the rumored 3rd row will fold like those in the Odyssey and Stream is the picnic table in the CR-V.
I suspect it's going to be a trade-off: you either get the table, or the seat.
Suzuki is so tiny you have to wonder if they can survive. Subaru sells more Foresters than all Suzuki trucks combined.
CR-V did outsell Escape in August, but Escape has a big lead for year-to-date sales. Liberty had the most sales in August but it's new.
-juice
Bob
Those mini vans like stream are designed for Asians. Average about a foot shorter, 80 pounds lighter. No sense bringing them here.
Bob
Let Suzuki handle the mini segments, which GM has never done well. Then let Subaru handle small to mid-size cars and crossover vehicles and AWD systems. Finally, let Isuzu help with trucks and source diesel engines. An isuzu diesel has let GM increase their diesel market share 1000% (not a typo).
It's remarkable that Honda is largely independent these days. Though they do get help, including from Isuzu (diesels, again).
-juice
We considered the CRV until we drove one. What a slug! My wife thought her previous Corolla was quicker (and that's not saying much). The CRV was noisy and felt pushed to keep up with 70 mph traffic. The interior reminded us too much of a Civic. Of course, the great Honda reliability is a big plus, but for the money, we felt the XL-7 gave you a lot more vehicle for the same price (and some even less).
The third row seat was not a big reason for us to buy, but a nice feature to have. Also the V6, real 4x4, towing capacity, and rear A/C all won us over.
I'll be curious to see the '02 CRV and see what improvements have been made.
I expect that Honda will bring an SE model back to the states in a few years. First they'll sel as many as possible while the 02 model is still new. When it gets closer to the end of its run, they'll spice it up with the SE.
Diploid - I may be misreading your post, but the Fullmark has always had the same side hinged gate. There has never been a left gate on a CR-V.
The XL7's 3rd seat is only really useful if you move the 2nd row forward. With the 2nd row all the way back, there is zero space for your feet.
Still, good for hauling kids and their friends.
-juice
I'm a bit surprized that Honda would adapt the CR-V for seven seats when the Stream is already available. The Stream even comes with RT4WD. I doubt that the SUV image is a big deal down there, so all I can figure is that they need more cargo space than the Stream provides, or they need ground clearance to get over rutted roads.
Earlier someone mentioned that ABS works with RT4WD. That's close but not quite. RT4WD automatically disengages when the brakes are applied, so that the ABS can send braking power to the three channels. They can't work at the same time. In fact, most of the time RT4WD will disengage when you lift your foot off the gas.
7 seats- There have been times when I could use 7 seats, too. I think the reason why 7 seat is being made into the CR-V is because Honda wants to lure buyers away from Suzuki's XL-7. The 3rd row may not be very useful for most, but a 3rd row is still a 3rd row, and a very effective marketing ploy. Also, I doubt if the Stream will ever make it over here.
I'm just hoping the 'surprise' is still in the engine. It would be nice for Honda to say "Fooled you! Our 4-banger doesn't make 160hp, it makes 180!"
I doubt if the CR-V can regain its best seller title. The Liberty, to my surprise, is selling very well.
But then again, if there isn't a demand, maybe we can have some flexibility with the pricing.
I think I'll play pessimist and wait until I actually see it on a Honda web site.
JM2C
At least with rumors, there's some excitement.