CR-V shopping

On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 07:56:31 -0500, "C. E. White"
> wrote:

>When we recently shopped for a new vehicle for my Mother we looked at
>the CR-V. We have a friend who has one as well. The friend's CR-V has
>been very reliable, but he says he wouldn't buy another one. His
>biggest complaint is the seating position. He has a base model with
>the non-power driver's seat. My biggest complaint about his CR-V was
>the wind noise. It was among the noisest vehicles on the highway I
>been in in a long time. For my Mother we decided against the CR-V
>becasue of the cost. She defintiely wanted a power seat and preferred
>leather. Unfortunately as soon as you looked for a CR-V equipped that
>way, you also got a sun roof, a fancy radio, and other stuff she
>didn't care about. This pushed the price up well beyond the other
>vehicles we looked at (Toyota Highlander, Ford Edge). She ended up
>getting the Highlander.
>
>Ed
>


Ed, just from research on line, I began to narrow it down to CR-V or
Highlander. I realize they aren't exactly the same but one of my main
concerns is reliability as I will eventually retire and be on a fixed
income so I don't want to spend a lot on repairs if possible. The
only negatives I see about the Highlander is the initial price and
tire size. I checked one shop and 19" tires are special order (3 or
so days). I guess tho, one doesn't change tires too often so that
inconvenience might not be too great compared to a lot of repairs in
the shop. I once drove a CR-V (2008 model) and I frankly thought it
was a bit underpowered tho I understand the newer ones have 14 more
horsepower but not sure how much difference that will make upon
accelerating, entering a highway. The stuff I read says it's more
about torque not horsepower for that so I don't know. I never test
drove or rode in a Highlander so my knowledge is strictly what I read
from others. Thank you Ed and everyone else.

On 11/10/09 4:14 PM, in article ,
"Observer" > wrote:

> On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 07:56:31 -0500, "C. E. White"
> > wrote:
>
>> When we recently shopped for a new vehicle for my Mother we looked at
>> the CR-V. We have a friend who has one as well. The friend's CR-V has
>> been very reliable, but he says he wouldn't buy another one. His
>> biggest complaint is the seating position. He has a base model with
>> the non-power driver's seat. My biggest complaint about his CR-V was
>> the wind noise. It was among the noisest vehicles on the highway I
>> been in in a long time. For my Mother we decided against the CR-V
>> becasue of the cost. She defintiely wanted a power seat and preferred
>> leather. Unfortunately as soon as you looked for a CR-V equipped that
>> way, you also got a sun roof, a fancy radio, and other stuff she
>> didn't care about. This pushed the price up well beyond the other
>> vehicles we looked at (Toyota Highlander, Ford Edge). She ended up
>> getting the Highlander.
>>
>> Ed
>>
>
>
> Ed, just from research on line, I began to narrow it down to CR-V or
> Highlander. I realize they aren't exactly the same but one of my main
> concerns is reliability as I will eventually retire and be on a fixed
> income so I don't want to spend a lot on repairs if possible. The
> only negatives I see about the Highlander is the initial price and
> tire size. I checked one shop and 19" tires are special order (3 or
> so days). I guess tho, one doesn't change tires too often so that
> inconvenience might not be too great compared to a lot of repairs in
> the shop. I once drove a CR-V (2008 model) and I frankly thought it
> was a bit underpowered tho I understand the newer ones have 14 more
> horsepower but not sure how much difference that will make upon
> accelerating, entering a highway. The stuff I read says it's more
> about torque not horsepower for that so I don't know. I never test
> drove or rode in a Highlander so my knowledge is strictly what I read
> from others. Thank you Ed and everyone else.

Highlander vs. CRV is really an apples to oranges comparison. CRV should be
compared to the 4 cylinder RAV-4 and Highlander competes with the Pilot if
you want to make a fair comparison.

On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 10:13:22 -0600, "E. Meyer" >
wrote:

>On 11/10/09 4:14 PM, in article ,
>"Observer" > wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 07:56:31 -0500, "C. E. White"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> When we recently shopped for a new vehicle for my Mother we looked at
>>> the CR-V. We have a friend who has one as well. The friend's CR-V has
>>> been very reliable, but he says he wouldn't buy another one. His
>>> biggest complaint is the seating position. He has a base model with
>>> the non-power driver's seat. My biggest complaint about his CR-V was
>>> the wind noise. It was among the noisest vehicles on the highway I
>>> been in in a long time. For my Mother we decided against the CR-V
>>> becasue of the cost. She defintiely wanted a power seat and preferred
>>> leather. Unfortunately as soon as you looked for a CR-V equipped that
>>> way, you also got a sun roof, a fancy radio, and other stuff she
>>> didn't care about. This pushed the price up well beyond the other
>>> vehicles we looked at (Toyota Highlander, Ford Edge). She ended up
>>> getting the Highlander.
>>>
>>> Ed
>>>
>>
>>
>> Ed, just from research on line, I began to narrow it down to CR-V or
>> Highlander. I realize they aren't exactly the same but one of my main
>> concerns is reliability as I will eventually retire and be on a fixed
>> income so I don't want to spend a lot on repairs if possible. The
>> only negatives I see about the Highlander is the initial price and
>> tire size. I checked one shop and 19" tires are special order (3 or
>> so days). I guess tho, one doesn't change tires too often so that
>> inconvenience might not be too great compared to a lot of repairs in
>> the shop. I once drove a CR-V (2008 model) and I frankly thought it
>> was a bit underpowered tho I understand the newer ones have 14 more
>> horsepower but not sure how much difference that will make upon
>> accelerating, entering a highway. The stuff I read says it's more
>> about torque not horsepower for that so I don't know. I never test
>> drove or rode in a Highlander so my knowledge is strictly what I read
>> from others. Thank you Ed and everyone else.
>
>Highlander vs. CRV is really an apples to oranges comparison. CRV should be
>compared to the 4 cylinder RAV-4 and Highlander competes with the Pilot if
>you want to make a fair comparison.

On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 10:13:22 -0600, "E. Meyer" >
wrote:

>On 11/10/09 4:14 PM, in article ,
>"Observer" > wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 07:56:31 -0500, "C. E. White"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> When we recently shopped for a new vehicle for my Mother we looked at
>>> the CR-V. We have a friend who has one as well. The friend's CR-V has
>>> been very reliable, but he says he wouldn't buy another one. His
>>> biggest complaint is the seating position. He has a base model with
>>> the non-power driver's seat. My biggest complaint about his CR-V was
>>> the wind noise. It was among the noisest vehicles on the highway I
>>> been in in a long time. For my Mother we decided against the CR-V
>>> becasue of the cost. She defintiely wanted a power seat and preferred
>>> leather. Unfortunately as soon as you looked for a CR-V equipped that
>>> way, you also got a sun roof, a fancy radio, and other stuff she
>>> didn't care about. This pushed the price up well beyond the other
>>> vehicles we looked at (Toyota Highlander, Ford Edge). She ended up
>>> getting the Highlander.
>>>
>>> Ed
>>>
>>
>>
>> Ed, just from research on line, I began to narrow it down to CR-V or
>> Highlander. I realize they aren't exactly the same but one of my main
>> concerns is reliability as I will eventually retire and be on a fixed
>> income so I don't want to spend a lot on repairs if possible. The
>> only negatives I see about the Highlander is the initial price and
>> tire size. I checked one shop and 19" tires are special order (3 or
>> so days). I guess tho, one doesn't change tires too often so that
>> inconvenience might not be too great compared to a lot of repairs in
>> the shop. I once drove a CR-V (2008 model) and I frankly thought it
>> was a bit underpowered tho I understand the newer ones have 14 more
>> horsepower but not sure how much difference that will make upon
>> accelerating, entering a highway. The stuff I read says it's more
>> about torque not horsepower for that so I don't know. I never test
>> drove or rode in a Highlander so my knowledge is strictly what I read
>> from others. Thank you Ed and everyone else.
>
>Highlander vs. CRV is really an apples to oranges comparison. CRV should be
>compared to the 4 cylinder RAV-4 and Highlander competes with the Pilot if
>you want to make a fair comparison.

I know that's why I said in my post above "I realize they aren't
exactly the same...." so I have to agree with you. I was just
trying to compare their reliability followed by maintenance costs tho
the maintenance costs may be unfair too. In any case, I know you are
correct but make allowances for my weak question <grin>. Thank you.

"E. Meyer" > wrote in message
...
> On 11/10/09 4:14 PM, in article
> ,
> "Observer" > wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 07:56:31 -0500, "C. E. White"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> When we recently shopped for a new vehicle for my Mother we looked
>>> at
>>> the CR-V. We have a friend who has one as well. The friend's CR-V
>>> has
>>> been very reliable, but he says he wouldn't buy another one. His
>>> biggest complaint is the seating position. He has a base model
>>> with
>>> the non-power driver's seat. My biggest complaint about his CR-V
>>> was
>>> the wind noise. It was among the noisest vehicles on the highway I
>>> been in in a long time. For my Mother we decided against the CR-V
>>> becasue of the cost. She defintiely wanted a power seat and
>>> preferred
>>> leather. Unfortunately as soon as you looked for a CR-V equipped
>>> that
>>> way, you also got a sun roof, a fancy radio, and other stuff she
>>> didn't care about. This pushed the price up well beyond the other
>>> vehicles we looked at (Toyota Highlander, Ford Edge). She ended up
>>> getting the Highlander.
>>>
>>> Ed
>>>
>>
>>
>> Ed, just from research on line, I began to narrow it down to CR-V
>> or
>> Highlander. I realize they aren't exactly the same but one of my
>> main
>> concerns is reliability as I will eventually retire and be on a
>> fixed
>> income so I don't want to spend a lot on repairs if possible. The
>> only negatives I see about the Highlander is the initial price and
>> tire size. I checked one shop and 19" tires are special order (3
>> or
>> so days). I guess tho, one doesn't change tires too often so that
>> inconvenience might not be too great compared to a lot of repairs
>> in
>> the shop. I once drove a CR-V (2008 model) and I frankly thought
>> it
>> was a bit underpowered tho I understand the newer ones have 14 more
>> horsepower but not sure how much difference that will make upon
>> accelerating, entering a highway. The stuff I read says it's more
>> about torque not horsepower for that so I don't know. I never
>> test
>> drove or rode in a Highlander so my knowledge is strictly what I
>> read
>> from others. Thank you Ed and everyone else.
>
> Highlander vs. CRV is really an apples to oranges comparison. CRV
> should be
> compared to the 4 cylinder RAV-4 and Highlander competes with the
> Pilot if
> you want to make a fair comparison.

I suppose you are technically correct, but that is not the way we
looked at it when we were shopping. From a price standpoint, the
Highlander and CR-V were much closer than the CR-V and RAV4. The RAV4
with similar equipment is much less expensive than the CR-V. The
Highlander my Mother ended up buying was over $1500 less than the
price we were quoted for a CR-V. The problem with the CR-V was how
they all seem to be equipped. The base Highlander my Mother purchased
included everything she wanted except leather seats. I talked her out
of those. Her Highlander has a very nice power drivers seat, alloy
wheels, a third row seat, A/C, power window, power locks, power this,
power that.....everythig she had on her wish list except the leather.
The CR-V we got a quote on had a power drivers seat, leather, a sun
roof (that was not wanted), electronic temperature control (another
unwanted item), and a much higher price tag. We checked with two Honda
dealers and it seemed you had two choices, a stripped down CR-V with
manual seats or an expensive model with a bunch of stuff my Mother did
not care about. Even the stripped down model cost about the same as
the base Highlander and much more than a base RAV4. The Highlander had
more room, rode better, was much quieter, and cost less....seemed like
a no brainer to us. I am sure the CR-V would get better gas mileage,
but my Mother only drives about 6,000 miles a year. I doubt she would
ever save enough on gas to justify the higher priced CR-V on that
basis. In the end, the CR-V was never even close. The Pilot was in a
completely different category in terms of price. The Pilots we looked
at were much higher priced than the Highlanders. Maybe Honda has a
stripped down Pilot version that can compete on price with a
Highlander, but we never saw one. The cheaspest Pilots we saw were
$7,000+ more than the Highlander my Mother purchased. I like Pilots,
and would even consider buying one for myself, but as far as my Mother
was concerned, they were in a whole different catregory.

Ed

On 11/12/09 6:40 AM, in article , "C.
E. White" > wrote:

>
> "E. Meyer" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 11/10/09 4:14 PM, in article
>> ,
>> "Observer" > wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 07:56:31 -0500, "C. E. White"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> When we recently shopped for a new vehicle for my Mother we looked
>>>> at
>>>> the CR-V. We have a friend who has one as well. The friend's CR-V
>>>> has
>>>> been very reliable, but he says he wouldn't buy another one. His
>>>> biggest complaint is the seating position. He has a base model
>>>> with
>>>> the non-power driver's seat. My biggest complaint about his CR-V
>>>> was
>>>> the wind noise. It was among the noisest vehicles on the highway I
>>>> been in in a long time. For my Mother we decided against the CR-V
>>>> becasue of the cost. She defintiely wanted a power seat and
>>>> preferred
>>>> leather. Unfortunately as soon as you looked for a CR-V equipped
>>>> that
>>>> way, you also got a sun roof, a fancy radio, and other stuff she
>>>> didn't care about. This pushed the price up well beyond the other
>>>> vehicles we looked at (Toyota Highlander, Ford Edge). She ended up
>>>> getting the Highlander.
>>>>
>>>> Ed
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ed, just from research on line, I began to narrow it down to CR-V
>>> or
>>> Highlander. I realize they aren't exactly the same but one of my
>>> main
>>> concerns is reliability as I will eventually retire and be on a
>>> fixed
>>> income so I don't want to spend a lot on repairs if possible. The
>>> only negatives I see about the Highlander is the initial price and
>>> tire size. I checked one shop and 19" tires are special order (3
>>> or
>>> so days). I guess tho, one doesn't change tires too often so that
>>> inconvenience might not be too great compared to a lot of repairs
>>> in
>>> the shop. I once drove a CR-V (2008 model) and I frankly thought
>>> it
>>> was a bit underpowered tho I understand the newer ones have 14 more
>>> horsepower but not sure how much difference that will make upon
>>> accelerating, entering a highway. The stuff I read says it's more
>>> about torque not horsepower for that so I don't know. I never
>>> test
>>> drove or rode in a Highlander so my knowledge is strictly what I
>>> read
>>> from others. Thank you Ed and everyone else.
>>
>> Highlander vs. CRV is really an apples to oranges comparison. CRV
>> should be
>> compared to the 4 cylinder RAV-4 and Highlander competes with the
>> Pilot if
>> you want to make a fair comparison.
>
> I suppose you are technically correct, but that is not the way we
> looked at it when we were shopping. From a price standpoint, the
> Highlander and CR-V were much closer than the CR-V and RAV4. The RAV4
> with similar equipment is much less expensive than the CR-V. The
> Highlander my Mother ended up buying was over $1500 less than the
> price we were quoted for a CR-V. The problem with the CR-V was how
> they all seem to be equipped. The base Highlander my Mother purchased
> included everything she wanted except leather seats. I talked her out
> of those. Her Highlander has a very nice power drivers seat, alloy
> wheels, a third row seat, A/C, power window, power locks, power this,
> power that.....everythig she had on her wish list except the leather.
> The CR-V we got a quote on had a power drivers seat, leather, a sun
> roof (that was not wanted), electronic temperature control (another
> unwanted item), and a much higher price tag. We checked with two Honda
> dealers and it seemed you had two choices, a stripped down CR-V with
> manual seats or an expensive model with a bunch of stuff my Mother did
> not care about. Even the stripped down model cost about the same as
> the base Highlander and much more than a base RAV4. The Highlander had
> more room, rode better, was much quieter, and cost less....seemed like
> a no brainer to us. I am sure the CR-V would get better gas mileage,
> but my Mother only drives about 6,000 miles a year. I doubt she would
> ever save enough on gas to justify the higher priced CR-V on that
> basis. In the end, the CR-V was never even close. The Pilot was in a
> completely different category in terms of price. The Pilots we looked
> at were much higher priced than the Highlanders. Maybe Honda has a
> stripped down Pilot version that can compete on price with a
> Highlander, but we never saw one. The cheaspest Pilots we saw were
> $7,000+ more than the Highlander my Mother purchased. I like Pilots,
> and would even consider buying one for myself, but as far as my Mother
> was concerned, they were in a whole different catregory.
>
> Ed
>
>

I guess it all depends on where you are. Around here, its the other way
around. The Honda dealers are huge and any of them will have all possible
combinations of accessories/trim lines & the Toyota dealers seem to be the
ones with only excessively tricked out stuff, little to pick from and all
with those irritating dealer added accessories stickers for $500 wheel
locks, pin stripes, etc.

The Japanese car makers do seem to have strange packaging ideas. When I
shopping at Nissan last year, to get NAV you had to buy a package that had
an additional $2,000 in unwanted stuff, besides the $2000 for the NAV
itself. They don't have a concept of picking and choosing options like the
American car makers (used to?) let you do.

"C. E. White" wrote:
<snip>

got a sun roof, a fancy radio, and other stuff she didn't care about.
This pushed the price up

<snip>

Yea, sunroof; who thought that was ever a good idea?
I will not buy a car with glass, fixed or moveable, mounted on a
horizontal surface.

--
Tp,

-------- __o
----- -\<. -------- __o
--- ( )/ ( ) ---- -\<.
-------------------- ( )/ ( )
-----------------------------------------

No Lawsuit Ever Fixed A Moron...

TomP wrote:
> "C. E. White" wrote:
> <snip>
>
> got a sun roof, a fancy radio, and other stuff she didn't care about.
> This pushed the price up
>
> <snip>
>
> Yea, sunroof; who thought that was ever a good idea?
> I will not buy a car with glass, fixed or moveable, mounted on a
> horizontal surface.


Suit yourself. The Honda versions fitted since 1988 don't leak.

Thus spake "E. Meyer" > :

>
>
>
>On 11/10/09 6:21 AM, in article
, "News" >
>wrote:
>
>> Dillon Pyron wrote:
>>> Thus spake TomP > :
>>>
<major snip>

>>
>> The CR-V is s short wheelbase, stiffly sprung car that is quite darty
>> and busy on the highway, especially over expansion joints.
>
>Speaking as a CR-V owner, I don't agree with those assertions, at least not
>when comparing the CR-V to other SUVs. The CR-V rides much more car-like
>than my Pathfinder and I don't know what you mean by "darty". We've driven
>it cross country several times at sustained highway speeds, 70 to 80 MPH.
>It drives straight effortlessly. Nothing "darty" about it.

The CR-V is "darty" and "skittish" mainly due to it's short WB. Which
is more noticeable on grooved roads. But the above two terms are
relative. What is "darty" to one person may be "quick" to another. I
road race for a guy who changes the WB of the car (Atlantic) depending
on the track. Long, gentle track, long wheelbase. Tight, twisty
track, short WB.

>
>My only two complaints are the road noise (its tire noise transmitted
>through the suspension, not wind) and the too small gas tank, both of which
>seem to be Honda traits, not just with the CR-V.
>
>>
>> Great on back roads though, and around town, as a hauler.
>
>That I agree with. Most versatile enclosed vehicle (open pickup still wins
>this category) I've owned.
>
--

- dillon I am not invalid

"Always shoot first. At the very least you'll
distract the guy enough to make the second one count"
-- Lazurus Long

Dillon Pyron wrote:
> Thus spake "E. Meyer" > :
>
>>
>>
>> On 11/10/09 6:21 AM, in article
>> , "News" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dillon Pyron wrote:
>>>> Thus spake TomP > :
>>>>
> <major snip>
>
>>> The CR-V is s short wheelbase, stiffly sprung car that is quite darty
>>> and busy on the highway, especially over expansion joints.
>> Speaking as a CR-V owner, I don't agree with those assertions, at least not
>> when comparing the CR-V to other SUVs. The CR-V rides much more car-like
>> than my Pathfinder and I don't know what you mean by "darty". We've driven
>> it cross country several times at sustained highway speeds, 70 to 80 MPH.
>> It drives straight effortlessly. Nothing "darty" about it.
>
> The CR-V is "darty" and "skittish" mainly due to it's short WB. Which
> is more noticeable on grooved roads. But the above two terms are
> relative. What is "darty" to one person may be "quick" to another. I
> road race for a guy who changes the WB of the car (Atlantic) depending
> on the track. Long, gentle track, long wheelbase. Tight, twisty
> track, short WB.
>
>> My only two complaints are the road noise (its tire noise transmitted
>> through the suspension, not wind) and the too small gas tank, both of which
>> seem to be Honda traits, not just with the CR-V.
>>
>>> Great on back roads though, and around town, as a hauler.
>> That I agree with. Most versatile enclosed vehicle (open pickup still wins
>> this category) I've owned.
>>


Safe to say he wouldn't choose the SWB F-Atlantic for use on an Interstate.