2001 - 2006 Honda CR-Vs

canadatwo · December 2001

I was not referring about the ability of car-based SUV's to go off road. I made no referenece to that and clearly stated that AWD systems differ in their abilities in snow/ice/rain. I am NOT talking about rock crawling, river crossing and rut jumping.

The issue is the ability of the AWD to provide full benefits in everyday ON-ROAD use.

The CR-V's systems is adequate and effective for many ON-ROAD uses and provides an extra measure of traction over 2WD vehicles.

The RAV-4 and the Subaru (more so) have systems that are MORE effective for ON-ROAD traction in many conditions as they are full time AWD. Often, reviews of Subarus will praise the very noticeable sure-footed traction of the car in just regular rain, never mind snow. That is a real AWD system at work ON-ROAD. Reviews of CRV's say that the RT4WD system is nice to have if you are going to get stuck. You do not get the same level of confidence with a CRV ON-ROAD as you do with a Subaru.

You have to weigh how important that fact is to your application along witht the 1000 other things when considering a vehicle purchase. It can be of real consequence and should not be ignored.

A poster on this board noted how he test drove both the 2002 CRV and 2002 Forester in Snow & Ice ON-ROAD and found the Subaru to provide noticeably better traction. This was important enough in their decision making process and shows that the two systems are not equal for ON-ROAD everyday use.

Again, we are NOT talking about taking the CR-V or any other car based SUV off-road. Please be clear about that.

Having said all of that, the X-Trail seems to provide the best of all worlds (except that it is not a Honda, if that matters)

suvshopper4 · December 2001

re AWD p/t v. f/t: You're nitpicking.

Let me guess: You own a Subaru?

artdecho · December 2001

canadatwo.....i agree, i think the x-trail has just about the best awd system out there...can be switched into FWD only for max economy (or when running on a donut spare tire for example), AWD-AUTO which is more pro-active than most, as it transfers power even under acceleration (doesn't wait for slippage to act) and finally, AWD-LOCK for when you're really in over your head. Quite similar to the MDX system, although the LOCK setting isn't limited to very low speeds as far as i know. Anyway, I guess Nissan will lose another customer to Honda unless they get their act together and get the X-Trail over here pronto.

varmit · December 2001

bfyerxa - The five speed for the first gen CR-V also has lower gearing than the auomatic, yet anecdotal evidence suggests that it averages slightly better mpg. The '02 may end up being even with the auto despite what the EPA predicts. We'll have to wait and see, of course.

Canadatwo - FYI. They didn't mention any 0-100 KM tests. They mentioned a "street start" which typically means a rolling start. In the US, these are conducted from 5-60 mph. This cannot be compared to a 0-60 number which allows for high revving, tire smoking launches.

Re AWD: Adequate is a FWD with a decent set of tires. Even without RT4WD, many CR-V owners report good performance both off-road (go to the CR-V IX and read about Gator Greg's adventures with Real Time Front Wheel Drive) and in bad weather. Since the CR-V's stock tires are just your average all-season tire, we have to assume that the long wheel base, wide stance, and suspension provide some degree of stability in slick conditions. (I'm talking 1st gen CR-V here.) Adding RT4WD to the mix gives you added security, but you still have to go slow and pay attention.

artdecho · December 2001

As far as I'm concerned, Honda's RT-4WD is equivalent to having a couple of guys in the back ready to give you a push when you can't get out of a snowbank or up a slippery hill but has very little, if any effect in day to day driving. Of course, it's lighter and more efficient than carrying around a couple of extra bodies for when you get stuck (not to mention more space-efficient!)

varmit · December 2001

Then you would be mistaken.

A great deal of fuss is made on these boards about the merits of AWD vs automatically engaged 4WD, but in "day to day" driving both systems are as necessary as that 8 track player your brother is keeping (just in case there is a sudden shortage of Barry Manilow music on disk).
Since this is a written discussion board all we can do is make paper comparisons. In a paper comparison it's easy to find quirks, kinks, and potential flaws in most any design. Proving that they make a difference in more than 0.0000001% of the accidents in the real world is another story.

Don't get me wrong, I believe that AWD is superior for getting power to the wheels, but, in the real world, there are extremely few times when it would be needed.

bailie · December 2001

To my fellow Canucks-I test drove a 2002 ex today and was quite impressed. It's quite a lot quieter than my 98 ex and seemed to have a lot more get up and go on steep hills. The ex model lists at 30,500 plus taxes of course. The dealer was willing to knock off 1,000 from list. To that I would like to add black cladding on the sides plus on the front as this seems to enhance the appearance a great deal and achieves a more rugged look. The cladding adds about a grand to the price but I could probably get a reduction on this as well. What do you folks think about the prices I have been quoted.

Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts. Respond to this message

ateixeira · December 2001

Thanks Robert. I've heard of a few bad trannies in the thread over in Vans. The consensus seems to be an extended warranty is worth it (but the price is already on the high side).

CR has the Odyssey as "average" in predicted reliability, with the MDX a bit better. I have faith that Honda will iron out whatever issues there are.

Check out the new C&D, the Liberty and Freelander V6 automatics did not manage to break the 10 second mark to reach 60mph. That's slower than the auto Forester in that Lilliputian test, but about the same as the last CR-V. They haven't tested a 2002 auto CR-V, but I bet it outruns both of those V6s.

-juice

tidester · December 2001

Congrats to you too, jfavour!

tidester
Host
SUVs

beatfarmer · December 2001

This is turning into a fertile discussion.

seguy · December 2001

will an average sized stroller fit long ways in the cargo area, or maybe a better question, how far is it from the back of the rear seats to the cargo door?

varmit · December 2001

Juice - Yep. Cylinders and HP don't mean nuthin' if you're too fat to get moving. The HP to weight ratio is more telling.

bailie · December 2001

To Marky777 It was originally a triple post due to some trouble I had with pasting but this has since been corrected. Most Canucks I know are more polite than you. If you don't wish to answer my question please refrain from issuing rude remarks. Anyway what's wrong with posting here and crvix as some folks don't read both panels.

tmanmiata · December 2001

Just wonder what is your opinion on extended warranty on new CR-V. Honda is usually pretty good, but it is a new design... how about those 99' Ody have tranny problem... It is kind of like a life insurance thing.
Anybody bought Honda Care? For how much? I recalled scname posted "Offered $795 for the 7 year Honda warranty, dealer want 995 but sounds like 895 is his bottom line." Is that 7/100k? I cannot even find a dealer offer even at $995.

jfavour, congratulation too!!!

canadatwo · December 2001

nitpicking - huh?
No, just providing useful information to help suv-shoppers make an informed choice. Again, each individual's needs are unique when it comes to a vehicle choice. Downplaying a difference as "inconsequential" is often a generalization that only applies to YOUR specific situation and decision criteria.

As well, confusing & clouding the issues outside the scope of the discussion (ie OFF/ON-ROAD use) can also be misleading.

I do NOT own a Subaru as I do not find the current Forester attractive enough for my tastes. This may change with the 2003 Forester.
I am also hoping Nissan brings the X-Trail to NA soon.

I find the Rav-4 is too "cute" & quirky looking.

The part-time automatic 4WD systems in the CRV, Vue, Escape etc do not provide the level of *constant* traction & confidence I *feel* I require for *my* driving situation.
I owned an Escape (gone now) and was very dissapointed with its 4WD system in both "Auto" and "On" modes. It's "On" mode should not be confused with the full-time electronic AWD systems in the Subaru or X-Trail. The Escape's 4WD actually hindered day to day driving on slippery roads. It mainly helped me climb steep short snowy hills and such.

And don't forget, tires can be the most important factor in winter driving, enough so that a front-drive car with good winter tires will outperfrom a 4WD SUV with poor all-seasons.

canadatwo · December 2001

Your opinion on the usefulness of AWD systems and its application sounds like a generalization that does not apply to all cases. Yes, I do wonder what about the use of 4x4 SUV's by "soccer mom's" in Florida.

For snow & ice covered roads, AWD can make a big difference in day to day driving. We get 3-5 months of bad conditions up here every year. The CR-V's system is effective to help you get out of slippery situations such as snowed in steep driveways and city streets. At highway speed, the AWD system in the Subaru will show its further superiority. Of course, AWD will not help you stop any faster and tire choice/condition can be critical.

This is based on actual experience of many people including myself. It is not merely a "paper" exercise.

Just because we do not have "% of accidents saved" information does not negate or lessen our opinions.

You are correct in reminding us to go slow & pay attention in adverse conditions. Many people suggest that a full time AWD system such as the Subaru or X-trail will allow you to drive with greater confidence or an increase safety margin.

dudka · December 2001

i have gotten a qoute for 2001 cr-v 7 year/100 000 mile coverage for about $750 from a dealer in vermont that deals on line. i bought my warranty from him for my civic back in 99 for $650. he said the price is good until december 31st. :-) let me know if interested.

suvshopper4 · December 2001

canadatwo: "nitpicking - huh? No, just providing useful information to help suv-shoppers make an informed choice."
&
"The part-time automatic 4WD systems in the CRV, Vue, Escape etc do not provide the level of *constant* traction & confidence I *feel* I require for *my* driving situation.

So, which is it you're trying to get at here? What's best for you, or what's best for others?

You've called a "generalization" the positive remarks regarding first-hand experience of one CR-Ver here, in his own "house".

If you want to nitpick for your own personal vehicle, fine. I don't blame you. Go for it. But to come into someone else's "house" and to put down their choice (and their first-hand experiences on what works just fine for them) is a bit much.

Good luck with your X-Trail if it comes available here, or whatever you choose. May it suit you well.

tmanmiata · December 2001

dudka, please share your info. nmnazareno posted a message about a month ago stated 7/100k $0ded for $535, did he give you the info for that? Thanks.

varmit · December 2001

LOL. No, this is not my or any other's CR-Ver's "house". It's an open forum where the opinions and perspectives of everyone can be written.

Bailie - I often cross post information both here and at the CR-V IX as well. I even drop in at the less popular SUV.com site from time to time. There are people who frequent one forum, but not the other. (Sorry, I have not experience with Canadian pricing.)

Canadatwo - Explain how a full-time AWD is different from part-time 4X4 when the 4X4 is engaged. Power is going to both axles. Unless you add a limited slip diff or lockers to the equation, they're doing the same thing.

It has been tested and demonstrated that the Forester handles better on a slippery slalom course. But then the Forester simply handles better. It may have nothing to do with the AWD. It's difficult to say how much of the advantage comes from the AWD or how much comes from the different tires, lower CG, or suspension tuning. Essentially, you have to take a CR-V and give it AWD or equip a Forester with RT4WD before you could say that the systems alone provides the advantage.

Why not give us some examples of when an AWD drive vehicle will have an advantage. Don't just list how deep the snow gets, tell us what happens when a tire slips. Describe for us what would happen in an AWD vehicle vs. what would happen in an automatically engaging 4X4 system.

Seriously, I've had this debate at least sixteen times. Read all four volumes of the CR-V vs. Forester thread going back to 1999. Juice can attest to how often we've discussed it and how little success there has been in establishing the significance of the AWD advantage.

As for generalizing... well, yes, I guess that's true. I'd rather do that than repeat this post every week when someone brings up the differences between the two systems. I typically sum it with a statement like this. If you're going to drive to work everyday over a frozen lake, buy the AWD. If not, RT4WD will do fine.

BTW, four tires coasting have "traction". AWD cannot increase traction, only changing the tires can. It's a common mistake to say that one or the other provides better traction. These systems merely distribute power to the tires in an attempt to provide forward movement if the tire has traction.

canadatwo · December 2001

Not putting down your CRV purchase at all. It is a perfectly adequate vehicle with a helpful 4WD system for what it was designed to do. It has a lot of other good traits & qualities that make it a good vehicle choice for many others.

Many prospective CRV buyers come to this board asking how the CRV compares to other mini-utes, often asking specifics about the 4WD system. They can decide for themselves whether they require the extra cpabilities of the full-time AWD systems or not.

Its 4WD system, while effective for many uses, is not at effective as the Subaru's or X-Trail's is at maintaining traction through adverse conditions.

A full-time AWD has several benefits over the "automatic" 4WD system in the CRV, Escape, Vue etc. This has been demonstrated many times.
It's disadvantages is higher fuel use on average.

Again, we are talking ON-ROAD day to day driving here.

canadatwo · December 2001

The difference is noticed in driving in adverse condtions. Try it and you will see.

The CRV et al first has to spin its front tires before RTFWD kicks in. The Subaru & X-Trail transfer torque smoothly between fron and back as required at all times. Much more effective.

rsholland · December 2001

argument unfortunately will continue to crop up here every couple of months or so, simply because we constantly get new posters who have not had the benefit of earlier similar discussions. So a lot of what has been said in the past, will be repeated again, and again, and again. It just goes with the turf...

I think juice and I are among the few long-standing Subie owners who frequent this forum. I certainly see and understand the RT4WD perspective. As Varmit and others have pointed out, they're both good systems. Even so, I still prefer the Subie solution a bit better. For me it's a combination of the AWD, and the low center of gravity of the boxer engine which helps afford the "sportier" handling. Plus Subaru is starting to make a big push towards making "sporty" products, including SUVs. I've always been a big fan of Saabs and Volvos for that very reason: they do an excellent job of combining "utility" with "sportieness." Subaru seems to be heading in that same directionand they're affordable.

Bob

snooklover · December 2001

I have been looking on the internet for a fair price on a 2002 CRV LX and I just had the sales manager at Honda of NOrth of Miami Beach email me an internet price of $500 above invoice: $18,311. That is far and away the best deal in all of Florida. All other dealers that I have come across are at MSRP (19,240) or above.Can anyone beat that price in Florida or anywhere for that matter?

rsholland · December 2001

Here's an interesting RT4WD vs. AWD question: If your RT 4WD CRV has to be towed, can it be towed like any other FWD vehicle? Or does it have to be put on a rollback like other full-time 4WDs and AWDs? If it normally drives like a FWD car, is there a need to put it on a rollback?

Bob

varmit · December 2001

Seguy - Here are the cargo area dimensions as described in the article posted earlier today.

"The 2002 CR-V's carpeted cargo area is wider and deeper than the previous model's. A low loading height of 685 mm (27 in.) and a wide rear opening of 1143 mm (45 in.) makes it easier to lift in heavy, bulky objects. The cargo floor is 0.9 metres (3.0 ft.) long to the back of the rear seats, and with the rear seats tumbled forwards, the cargo area is 1422 mm (56 in.) in length..."

Here's the whole story Canadian Driver

Bob - The CR-V can be towed on all fours (like behind an RV). There are instruction in the owner's manual, but I don't have it handy. However, I believe two wheel towing is a problem.

varmit · December 2001

I stand corrected. Earlier I posted that the Canadian Driver article specified a "street start", which typically means a rolling start in my vocabulary. Having reread the article, I see that they do specify 0-100 kph. They must have a different definition of "street start".

FWIW, the AJAC (Auto Journalists Association of Canada) gave their top SUV slot to the new Jeep.

diploid · December 2001

Actually, spotted 2 of them today. They look a lot porkier in real life, IMHO. The tail lights are a big improvement over the previous version. I was so afraid they'd give it the frosted glass treatment that the new Civic sedans got.

conix · December 2001

Hi,

I'd like some opinions from all you experts out there.

I just purchased a brand new 2001 CR-V LE (SE in US) which I like everything about it so far EXCEPT driving it.

Few days ago I posted a message complaining about streering wheel vibration. Someone suggested that I should check the tire pressure, and it should not be set too high. Acutally, they were originally set to 26PSI when I first picked up the car, and I set them to 28PSI for better fuel consumption just like many people do. I did feel the vibration in either case.

Now my complains & observations are :

* Streering wheel vibration - it's felt worst around 80Kph, seems worse going up hill, the vibration isn't so noticeable beyond 110kph

* Noise - I was told that CR-V is noisy. But frankly I did not expected it to be this bad. I understand engine & tire noise due to lack of sound proofing. However, there seems to be some noise coming from wheel(s), not tires, probably from bearings. When the vehicle reaches around 100+ kph, the streering vibrartion is less noticeable like I mentioned above, but there's some other noise that developes as the vibration fades away, the noise getting worse at higher speed. I originally thought this noise was engine noise, but I'm just under 3000rpms cruising on highway, and I reach that point many times in city driving and never noticed any engine noise that bothered me. This noise is very low frequnency noise

I'm no longer suspecting wheel balancing problem. I'm suspecting something else, such as Wheel Bearings, CV joint, or transmission.

I'll definitely take it to the dealer and have them look at it. The problem is I usually don't trust these mechanics. They are the ones supposedly already checked everything (as part of Pre-Delivery Inspection) before the delivery. If the experts don't see the problem and I do, what's up with that?

So far my CR-V has been a big disappointment. Any help would be greatly appreciated..

Conix

zircon2 · December 2001

Why do subies have to spoil every party, telling us how their shrimp-like cars' wheels will never spin in the snow. Who cares.

Only problem with new CR-V seems to be price (in Canada). Up about 8%. Too much.

Why did canucks get leather and external temp. guage and yanks didn't? This seems like odd marketing.

Conix: older model CR-V is noisy, but almost bulletproof. You must have got an (unusual) lemmon regarding vibs. Take it back. Mechanic at Honda siad it is the only vehicle he never fixes! New CR-V is much quieter than 91 model - too bad. When you kick the old one, she barks. New one just motors on out.

Canadian Auto Journalists chose Liberty as new SUV of the year, eh? I wonder if that was before or after the Escape-like recalls.

BTW, priced new CR-V versus Vue. Vue is expensive at upper end (also lacks leather), plus depreciation will probably be bad. Despite CR-V price increase, is it a better buy? Best in small SUV?

slugline · December 2001

You can tow the RT4WD CR-V behind a motorhome, as varmit said. In short, you must start the engine, row the levers through all the gears, put the vehicle in neutral, then leave the ignition in the accessory position. This must be repeated each time immediately before towing, or every eight hours. Full details are in the owner's manual, or on http://www.ahm-ownerlink.com. This site is highly recommended for every Honda owner; Honda releases all sorts of vehicle-specific info to those registered there.

Meanwhile, if your RT4WD CR-V needs to be towed because of accident or breakdown, it must be on a flatbed towtruck. Keep in mind that the RT4WD hydraulics are active any time the CR-V's wheels are spinning, even when the engine is off.

suvshopper4 · December 2001

conix: I don't know about your dealership, but I think some dealerships use lesser-trained techs to do the dealer prep, and keep their top techs available for repairs, where more expertise is needed. So it is worth letting them have a go at it.

Good luck with sorting out your vibration problem. Doesn't sound normal.

conix · December 2001

Well, I test drove both 2002 and 2001 model. I really did like the ride in 2002 model better, but this car is supposed to be my wife's, and she hated 2002's design, both inside and outside, which I agree with her, especially the interior part. Besides, the new one was going to cost almost CDN $5000 more, and I did not like the hole in the wheel well at all.

So I picked up 2001 model. I have a couple of friends who bought them (CR-Vs) in the first model year, and they both love it, which was the reason that motivated us to shop for CR-V. I just hope that the problem is something minor, not mechanical. The wheel balancing problem alone can cause all the problems I'm experiencing, and I'm hoping for this to be the case.

I told my salesman 2-3 times and specifically asked him to make sure that I don't have either WHEEL BALANCING problem or ALIGNMENT problem when I receive the car. If it turns out to be wheel balancing problem, well, what should I do to him?

I live 30Km away from the dealer, and my workplace is even farther. I did this on purpose, because my wife's work is near that dealer, and I did not expected to go back to the dealer for service this early..

varmit · December 2001

A word of advice. Always test drive your vehicle before you sign papers.

That noise doesn't sound like "normal" CR-V noise. Unfortunately, there are a number of things that it could be. Some CR-V IX members posted a problem with a "buzzy vibration" at specific rpms. You can read about it here. And these are the alignment specs for the CR-V if you want to check on those. Now, if you were experiencing a "clunking" sound from the front of the car, I would recommend that you check out this, but that fix hasn't been needed in quite some time.

rsholland · December 2001

<< Why do subies have to spoil every party, telling us how their shrimp-like cars' wheels will never spin in the snow. Who cares. >>

Apparently many CRVers and Subie fans here seem to welcome the comparison, otherwise the discussions wouldn't be occurring.

I believe the reason there are so many Subie posts here are do to the fact that: A) Subies and CRVs are often cross-shopped, and

some of us Subie owners enjoy the discussions here, and have stuck around. I participate on a regular basis in several forums, in which I don't own that type of vehicle in which the topic is about.

Bob

artdecho · December 2001

Actually, the CR-V and Liberty tied in the compact SUV class.....Liberty got the nod overall when all classes of SUV were combined.
I believe the CD's "street start" is what a typical driver would do to get a 0-60 time, as opposed to the normal 0-60 testing where the engine is reved and then the clutch is popped.
This would account for the more "real world" type figures (around 10 sec) as opposed to the posted 0-60 times of Car & Driver etc of about 8.5 sec.

maxamillion1 · December 2001

I had a chance to check out the new CR-V a couple weeks ago. I actually liked them, I didn't care for the first gen model. The styling looks similar to the last gen, but it looks wider, rounder and meaner. The interior was roomy enough, but I didn't like how the center console looked, and some of the materials were very hard. Any problems with CR-Vs yet outside of the recall I heard about earlier. Which colors do you all prefer, I personally like the dark blue color. Thanks in advance.

carnivalj · December 2001

My 2002 V is great. I'm so much happier with it that I was with the 98 Civic I had. I am used to a console-all the hondas I've had have always had them but the center tray is nice enough for what I use it for. I have had mine since Nov 23 and have been getting 24-26 MPG so far. I have read on some forums of people getting better than this so I hope as the engine breaks in better that my mileage (not that I'm complaining) might go up a bit more.

I got the Satin Silver. But...I would have gotten the red if it came with the black interior instead of the tan (ewww!)

maxamillion1 · December 2001

That's why I like the Blue color the best, but I also like the red color as well. I wonder if I could have the dealer install aftermarket leather?

bailie · December 2001

Any Canadians out there who may know the invoice price for the 2002 crv auto ex? (not Leather)

jrdwyer · December 2001

Has anyone here used the CRV in light duty off road use? Such situations as driving through pasture or crop fields, steep gravel or dirt roads(aka appalachia), rutted roads, etc. The specs show 8 inches of ground clearance and the departure angles look o.k. from pictures. And the new 2.4l should have enough low end, especially with a 5 spd. Does the 2002 engine get any sort of skid plates and is the muffler protected? Are the tires somewhat agressive or just road tires?

I am looking for a small sport ute to replace my sedan, and I don't really need the toughness or heaviness of a Jeep Liberty. I would prefer something like the 2002 CRV with its decent gas milage, better on-road manners, and good build quality. It will be interesting to see what the next Suzuki Vitara/Chevy Tracker will be like and also the new Forester. Thanks.

dudka · December 2001

dudka, please share your info. nmnazareno posted a message about a month ago stated 7/100k $0ded for $535, did he give you the info for that? Thanks

No he/she never contacted me about the qoute. mine is from a finance manager from a dealership in vermont, the qoute is for 2001 cr-v se for $730 with $50 deductible for 7 year/100 000 mile coverage. you can call town and country honda in berlin vt, at 802-223-9700, and ask to speak with Chip Worthen. Tell him that David Budek told you to give him a call about the honda care warranty. hopefully he will remeber who i am, :-) he will fedex you the papers to sign, and will charge your credit card, and you will get the paperwork from honda finance directly in about a month or so.

theracoon · December 2001

Try this link from http://www.hondasuv.com for a long list of trips, most with pictures.

http://www.ptcruiserusa.com/hondasuv/crvix/roadtrips.htm

From personal experience the CR-V does just fine off road, assuming you're not taking it boulder crawling. I've driven my '99 CR-V EX 5spd through fields, dirt roads, gravel roads, snow mobile trails (covered with snow), and a healthy dose of mud and shallow streams. The earlier CR-Vs had a front skid plate available as an accessory, I don't know about the 2002. The muffler and rear differential are not protected on the earlier CR-Vs, again I don't know about the 2002.

Good luck!

robertsmx · December 2001

MT TOY had automatic transmission 2002 CRV, and it (or any other vehicle in the test) didn't get stuck anywhere as they mention it, so it may do okay for some offcourse driving, but certainly not boulder bashing.

robertsmx · December 2001

Just learnt that a European magazines mentions possible launch of Honda's mid-size SUV placed between CRV and MDX, sometime in 2002 Summer. The prototype may be on display at Detroit Auto Show.

maxamillion1 · December 2001

I hope it looks good. I am tired of the Ford Explorer and the Toyota 4Runner, I am dying to see just what Honda has in store for us with this new Honda SUV. Please don't let it look like the Passport I hate those SUVs (We own a 1995)

tmanmiata · December 2001

Thanks for the info

dfielding · December 2001

I noticed the Jeep Liberty mentioned a few times lately. I thought some perspective CRV buyers might be interested in a sample post from the Liberty problems town hall section (It is fairly representative of what many others are saying there):

Remember me. I now have about 7000 miles on my Liberty. It's been in the shop a total of 4 times for the same problem, vibration in the steering wheel. Please read previous messages for details. There is still a vibration in the steering wheel at highway speeds. It is mild, but I can see my hand vibrating when I put my hand on the steering wheel. Also, I have noticed that the engine has missed a couple times. I can't duplicate the problem though. Actually, this morning, I was almost in an accident. It was not raining, but had been a little bit. I was pulling onto an onramp, going about 15 miles per hour and I started skidding. I left off the gas and the brake and it slid for a little bit and came to a stop. I was on a hill. I gave it a little gas and it spun up the hill. It was a very close call, lots of cars behind me. And yet another problem. The lights on my dash board (mileage reading and radio) get really bright and then go dim really fast when I have the lights on. Very strange stuff. I am scared of my Liberty. I do not feel safe in it after all the problems I've had with it. Still debating on doing the Lemon Law.

dz6t · December 2001

I got my 2001 CR-V for 3 weeks now and already put more than 800 miles on it. I like the 01 over 02 because of two reasons: 1. Price, $200 below invoice with 1.9% vs. MSRP 2. It looks more like a Jeep to me ( I was cross shopping with Jeep), well, the 2002 is very handsome.

But, I am not very happy with two things:
1. I have to twist my wrist to start the car.
2. The head-liner feels like sand paper. I brought it back to the dealer and let them take a look at it. They were surprised. For all the 2001 CR-V owners out there, what does your CRV's head-liner feel like?

Thanks for any info regarding the head-liner.

canadiancl · December 2001

bailie, it is your lucky day since I just happen to have the info from Carcostcanada.com!

Invoice (dealer cost as they call it) on the '02 EX auto non-leather is $27,176 not including PDI & freight.

Now please bear in mind that I believe "dealer cost" has factored in the holdback which has been the subject of some debate as to whether or not should be added back to determine "invoice". In other words, should the dealer be entitled to not pass on the holdback to the customer?

2001 - 2006 Honda CR-Vs

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles