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
#15703 of 16202 Re: Photo of cargo area [pointatob]
May 01, 2006 (9:37 am)
I think the platform thing is a matter of semantics. This "new" platform for the RDX and CR-V appears to share many common features with the new Civic. Yet, there are many differences, as well.
In today's day and age, the term platform means next to nothing. Nissan has FWD and RWD and AWD vehicles on the same "platform". Honda has trucks, SUVs, and minivans being built on the same lines (which should indicate the same platform), yet they have completely different architectures. When the 1999 Ody was first announced, we were told it was based on a highly-modified Accord platform. Now we consider it a separate design. Honda's assembly plants in Ohio have been modified to the point where they can build just about anything, regardless of which platform it is based upon.
How many differences must there be before a platform is considered different than the design which it modified? If the CR-V/RDX share 50% of the assembly process with the Civic, should we consider them the same platform?
In this case, I think we have to give Honda the benefit of the doubt. Since the word "platform" has almost no real meaning anymore, Honda gets to call it whatever they want.
As for pics, try the ones below.
That one shows the RDX cargo bay with the "shelf" removed from the floor. The "shelf" is a large, flat, carpet-covered piece of plastic, which serves as the cargo floor most of the time. However, it may also be placed on top of the metal glides where it serves as both a shelf and cargo cover. It is completely missing in that photo.
Look closely and you'll see that something is missing from the floor (leaving a lip where the shelf normally rests).
Okay, that picture shows the cargo floor with the shelf in place. It's serving duty as a level floor in this pic. When mounted as a shelf/cover, those two string are attached to the hatch. When you open the hatch, the shelf lifts up (like my old 323 hatchback).
The whole arrangement is very similar to what Chevy did with their Equinox.
#15704 of 16202 Re: 2001 CR-V Strange Buzzing or Rattle [tomf7]
May 01, 2006 (9:34 am)
Have the timing belt tensioner checked.
#15705 of 16202 Re: 2003 CR-V losing oil [blueiedgod]
May 01, 2006 (6:14 pm)
"Looser engine will let the combustion byproducts into the oil giving you the impression that the oil level does not change. In some exptreme cases, oil level rises with time. This is because combustion byproducts and water condensation make their way into the oil pan."
Well, I never had my engine oil analyzed, but it never looked dirty at any time in those 44K miles. Personally, I don't think that a 44K Honda engine is "loose". However, I did run the factory oil to 7500 miles, as recommended by Honda.
I should note that before the Honda I had Fords, which went through about 1 quart every 2500 miles. My current Ford has not used any oil yet (3700 miles).
#15706 of 16202 Re: Photo of cargo area [varmint]
May 02, 2006 (7:12 am)
Nissan has FWD and RWD and AWD vehicles on the same "platform"
I don't think that's correct - the Altima, Maxima, Murano, and Quest use the FM platform, FWD or AWD. The Z, G35, and FX use a different platform, RWD or AWD.
But I don't think you'll find FWD and RWD on the same platform at Nissan.
Any how, the point is valid, we see a lot of variation from a tiny Z coupe to a massive FX45 SUV.
#15707 of 16202 Re: Photo of cargo area [ateixeira]
May 02, 2006 (9:53 am)
The FM is the one underpinning the G35 sedan, coupe, and FX. But the same basic platform is used for FWDers (Altima/Murano), as well.
Go into any thread where a Honda fan defends the TL and RL being FWD-based as a result fo platform-sharing, and you'll find a RWD proponent mentioning that Nissan can do it, so Honda should too.
#15708 of 16202 Re: Photo of cargo area [varmint]
May 02, 2006 (10:06 am)
I'm wrong about the name, but I'm pretty sure they are two seperate platforms.
Yeah, Maxima is on the FF-L platform, the rear drivers are indeed FM.
To make things more confusing, the new Altima is now on the D platform. Go figure.
I'm sure they share some parts, though.
#15709 of 16202 RAV4 not competition?
May 02, 2006 (2:05 pm)
In Edmund's take on the new CR-V, they say that it will no longer be competing with the RAV4.
'Cause of the optional V6? The third row? 'Cause the CR-V looks to be staying the same size while the RAV4 grew in size?
That statement seems pretty silly to me. Just from observation, I thought the RAV4 needed to grow to be competitive, while the CR-V is already pretty roomy for its class. And, while having an optional V6 is certainly nice, it doesn't put the RAV4 into a different class, and the bread-and-butter will still be the 4-cyl.
#15710 of 16202 Re: RAV4 not competition? [breld]
May 02, 2006 (4:40 pm)
"That statement seems pretty silly to me. Just from observation, I thought the RAV4 needed to grow to be competitive, while the CR-V is already pretty roomy for its class. And, while having an optional V6 is certainly nice, it doesn't put the RAV4 into a different class, and the bread-and-butter will still be the 4-cyl."
It isn't the V6. If the sneak peaks are true, the angled the rear roofline, and this is going to reduce the cargo capacity, making the CR-V a COMPACT, rather than midsize SUV. (Unless the increase interior dimensions somewhere else).
#15711 of 16202 Re: Considering CRV [mnolan770]
May 03, 2006 (6:12 am)
yes.i own jeeps.and ill tell ya i got a 2005 crv rides nice and iam very happy with it . and ill tell ya im not happy with the jeeps; now i know when they say you woulent under stand its a jeep thing i know now i wont buy anymore
#15712 of 16202 Re: RAV4 not competition? [breld]
May 03, 2006 (6:45 am)
People will still cross-shop them.
Most RAV4s are 4 bangers, and most don't have the 3rd row. I'm sure about half of them overall are 4-cylinder 5 seaters, same as the CR-V.
I'm sure a few will cross-shop Pilots with V6/7 seaters, but honestly I'd expect more CR-V shoppers.