Last post on Mar 23, 2013 at 12:10 PM
You are in the Honda CR-V
What is this discussion about?
Honda CR-V, SUV
#15318 of 16202 Paylaod capacity of the 2006 CRV EX
Jan 08, 2006 (4:35 pm)
Looking for the payload capacity of the 2006 CRV EX, not listed on Honda website nor does it show when you do a comparo on this site. We have a 98 CRV EX, Bought new in June of 1997 with 101k. Kids are alot bigger. Went on a ski trip last week where we estimated with passengers and cargo we were in the 950 range, used a Yakima rocket box and ski rack too!. Want to consider the new CRV but want to make sure it has a larger capacity than the 98. Thx.
#15319 of 16202 Re: Paylaod capacity of the 2006 CRV EX [jwb18t]
Jan 09, 2006 (10:45 am)
I want to say 850, but that may depend on model and transmission.
#15320 of 16202 Re: Paylaod capacity of the 2006 CRV EX [jwb18t]
Jan 10, 2006 (12:22 pm)
850 is correct, according to the owners manual (page 151, under load limits) of my 2006 EX. No mention of it being different for different models, although the sticker on the door jam might be a good place to look as well.
Jan 11, 2006 (3:59 pm)
I would have to guess that the '06's payload is higher than previous models and even '02-04 CRVs because those all came with 15" wheels & tires. Tire size is also factored in when engineers calculate the maximum payload.
The '05-06 models have 16" wheels and larger 215-65 tires which in themselves can handle more weight than the 205-70-15's. 1653 vs 1499, a difference of 154lbs.
I also believe the previous gen. CRV ('01 & older) like yours, has 25-30 less HP (but curb weight is less too) with less torque. So my guess would be the payload capacity of a '98 CRV would be around 700lbs, 750 the most. Don't feel bad. RAV-4's have a payload max. capacity of 675lbs. 850 is not bad but still on the low side. Now keep in mind these #s include the driver as well.
Many claim that Honda always publishes smaller payload #s on purpose and that the real #s are a bit higher. I kind of believe that because if you look at many V6 SUV's and pickup trucks with only 180-200hp (not a lot), you will see that their payload capacity is 1,500lbs. That's over a 75% increase! A huge increase if you consider the fact that they weigh much more than a CRV, and only have 20-25% more HP and 25-30% more torque. Now I 'm not saying HP/torque and payload capacity are increased geometrically in relation to each other. It's probably exponentially but still, a lot of these trucks weigh 3800lbs, 500+lbs more than the CRV!
I think the truth is as you found out that the CRV can take a lot more weight than the recommended payload (which btw, the # should be on your door, required by law) but I 'm guessing Honda is afraid, and rightfully so, of an increased # of warranty repairs should the owners operate their CRVs with the "actual" (higher) max. payload capacity for prolonged periods of time. The tranny, shocks and bushings (rear mostly) would be affected in that order from the most expensive to the cheapest. Tires would also deteriorate faster. They don't want people to haul heavy loads of stuff in their CRVs. It takes its toll on the car (any vehicle) if done frequently and major components would fail earlier giving the CRV an average or not so great reliability rating. I don't really blame them. It's just smart planning and looking out for yourself, and even us, the consumer.
My guess is the Ridgeline can haul twice as much with ease and was designed more for that. Our CRV's are really just tall cars. My wife's previous '01 Altima & '98 Accord could haul pretty close to what our '04 CRV can. We haven't really seen any benefits to buying the CRV except for sitting higher but my wife quickly learned that you still can't see ahead of you if there 's another SUV in front of you. Her main reason for wanting the CRV was to "see around other taller cars or SUV's"!! I tried explaining to her that with another CRV, or Cherokee or Explorer in front of her, nothing would change unless she was driving a MACK truck or 18-wheeler. She didn't believe me until after she bought the CRV and found out I was right
#15322 of 16202 Re: oil changes [only1harry]
Jan 11, 2006 (5:20 pm)
harry... from your reply it sounds like you didn't check the color of the oil before storage?
my car... 2 years not many miles.
with my workhorse explorer, i have the oil changed avery 3k. other commuter vehicles, every 5k.
#15323 of 16202 Re: payload capacity [only1harry]
Jan 11, 2006 (7:02 pm)
Actually, the 05-06 models weigh more than the 02-04 CR-Vs. That cuts into the amount of weight they can carry. And having larger tires doesn't improve payload if the limiting factor is the suspension, brakes, or chassis.
Jan 12, 2006 (7:53 am)
The 675 lb. number is actually from the Honda Element.
The RAV4 had a payload of 760 lbs, and of course the new generation that just came out has a lot more than that, I think about ~1100 lbs since it has a 3rd row of passengers to haul.
CR-V has been at 850 lbs all along, I believe. But to get the exact number, look at the GVWR in your door jamb, then subtract your curb weight.
#15325 of 16202 2007-2008 CRV Spy Pic
Jan 12, 2006 (1:44 pm)
In my new Popular Mechanics magazine, there was a very small spy pic of the 2007-08 CRV. Said it would have a 200 hp four. Nothing about a six being offered. Wonder if it may not come out until late 2007.
#15326 of 16202 Re: 2007-2008 CRV Spy Pic [dmutt]
Jan 12, 2006 (1:47 pm)
Late 2006 is when it's expected. The CR-V model year starts in mid-October.
#15327 of 16202 There won't be a six-cylinder..
by kyfdx@Edmunds HOST
Jan 12, 2006 (1:50 pm)
The new Acura RDX, which is built on the same platform is getting a turbo-charged version of the 2.3 litre 4-cylinder.. My guess is the new CR-V will get a tweaked version of the same engine it has now... like the TSX..