Last post on Nov 22, 2011 at 2:06 PM
You are in the Honda CR-V
What is this discussion about?
Honda CR-V, Ford Escape, Car Safety, Fuel Efficiency (MPG), SUV
Jul 22, 2002 (10:40 am)
I don't know what you are so happy about. The 2001 CR-V (which is what you are driving around in by the way) scored no better than the Escape.
The Kia was tested at the same time your model CR-V was tested (1998). Looks like Honda had the same thing in common until a couple of months ago. They've just had a little more time to make some adjustments for this most recent test.
Jul 22, 2002 (11:00 am)
I agree with the 4 foot stopping distance, but you would be quite silly to say that you would opt for that over the crash safety of the 2002 CRV. I agree with Varmint that: Escape owners generally have excuses and crv owners generally have theories. Besides the 5mph bumper test and the 4 foot stopping distance, towing, what do you guys have?
In, hondaman's defense....
Back in when the first generation CRV came out in 1997 it wasn't the bottom of the pack like the Escape is now! The escape came out last year and it is the WORST along with the Kia.
Jul 22, 2002 (11:32 am)
"Back in when the first generation CRV came out in 1997 it wasn't the bottom of the pack"
Back in 1997 when the CR-V came out it only had two real competitors. The RAV4 and the Cherokee. As you can see in hondaman's link, neither one did well in the IIHS crash scenario either. All three rated marginal which puts each of them at the top and at the bottom of the pack.
If safety is so important to all those around here that own pre-2002 CR-V's, why don't you all own Foresters or Wranglers? They tested much better than the previous iteration of the CR-V.
"I agree with the 4 foot stopping distance..."
I didn't mention anything about the stopping distance (I don't think anyway) so you must have me confused with someone else. But since you brought it up, I'll try to post Motor Trend's test data for the two. I believe the difference was eight feet for them. The CR-V did win their 0-60 (auto trans in both) by .1 sec, but lost it in the quarter mile by something like .5 sec. I'll try to find it tonight.
"Besides the 5mph bumper test and the 4 foot stopping distance, towing, what do you guys have?"
A vehicle that we liked a lot more than the CR-V and any other mini-ute.
Jul 22, 2002 (11:39 am)
Scape - I wasn't challenging your 4ft. data. I was talking about the crash tests. If you can prove shifting the test one inch will magically improve the Escape's score to a rating higher than the CR-V's, then we've got something to talk about. I doubt very much that you have that information. For all we know, the Escape might get worse if you change the test.
Right now, all of the data says the CR-V is safer in a crash.
Regarding the older models: Yes, the CR-V that was designed about 8-9 years ago was as safe as the Escape designed a few years back. The current CR-V and Escape models are much closer in terms of design age than the 1st gen CR-V and Sportage (which is quite possibily the oldest). Even the Freelander, which has been out for a long, long time scored higher than the Escape.
Daveghh - With this satement, "Besides the 5mph bumper test and the 4 foot stopping distance, towing, what do you guys have?", you are asking for more information than we (the forum) can possibly handle at once. It doesn't matter if it's correct or not. Let's stick with one topic at a time.
**edit** You snuck in on me there Baggs...
The other competitor was the Sidekick. Probably more so than the Cherokee. The IIHS crash test data for these vehicles was not available for the first few years of sales. Even now, it is not exactly common knowledge. I've spoken with several well-educated buyers who compare safety by looking for safety equipment, but not actual crash data.
Jul 22, 2002 (12:35 pm)
Am I reading some excuses above?
If we go by safety equipment, I believe it is a draw. Except for the CR-V's dual pre-tensioners on the seat belts. (note that the seat belts were recalled early in the CR-V, all seems well now)
#1325 of 8533 Chicken......................
Jul 22, 2002 (12:39 pm)
All right, sometimes I get really into this Escape versus CRV argument, but when it comes down to it their isn't a whole heck of a big difference between the two vehicles.
The only "major differences" I see are the following things.
-reliability, only assuming statistics are accurate
Other then the major differences I stated we might as well be arguing the differences between Purdue and Gold-n-plump chicken breasts!
#1326 of 8533 Safety test
Jul 22, 2002 (4:58 pm)
YOu claim the CRV is safer in a crash.. you fail once again to say OFFSET crash ONLY. You are making this out to look like the Escape is a tin can! One test, I say again ONE TEST the offset crashtest the CRV does better than the Escape, lets make this clear. And you fail to mention the lost data of the IIHS they mention in a lower paragraph. You have to wonder why they didn't upgrade that catagorey when they compared it with Mazda/Fords data and said it was actually good??
Playing down the vehicles ability to stop in the first place to avoid an accident is a typical Honda ploy. The Escape stops better than the CRV, has lower repair costs, out tows, is more powerful, has more payload, more GVWR. The V6 is an advantage in vehicles of this weight. You forget I drove an automatic CRV up Hwy 26 over MT Hood loaded down with 4 adults and about 400lbs of weight.. the 160HP 2.4 had to gasp and shift.. The Escape takes this added weight with no problems because of its 40HP/40ft/lbs of torque advantage..
My vacation was great! Like I said saw more RAV4's in California than CRV's and Escapes.. Don't know why? I would take the CRV over that dinky RAV4. The RAV4 is a spendy little bugger..
Jul 22, 2002 (6:03 pm)
We are not talking about my 2001 CRV. We are comparing todays vehicles and the Escape is not even as good as my 2001 which is a 7-8 year old design. data is data and you have been asking for it and after all this back bumper thing, it is nice to have real proof for once to show you.
I was hit in the back at 30mph in March by a new Explorer and received half the expense (damage wise) as he did. So I think Ford has a way to go yet with safety.
Honda has used valuable knowledge from racing incidents and transmitted this to their passenger cars. Racing technology does pay off and Honda is light years ahead of Ford there.
Jul 22, 2002 (6:07 pm)
Scape you are starting to repeat yourself again. We all know there is a 40hp adavntage and a four foot braking distance blah blah.... No one is going to disagree with you there. You all wanted comparisons and now they are coming. I don't care about how fast I can get to the other stop sign or towing 3000 pounds....I want safety and reliability and quality.
Jul 22, 2002 (8:59 pm)
Scape, you messed up on saying the Escape has a different ground clearance then what ford sites! Then you don't 'fes up to the mistake...
Then you say that the crv only "beats" the escape in the offset category! You are wrong, my friend, the crv also bested the escape in the national highway test as well! Are you that forgetful!
You also forgot that my girl friend has a v6 and it does not beat my CRV in the 0 to 60 test!!! SAD very sad because it is a V6. You also pail in comparison in the mileage category.
By the way, in regards to what you said a while ago about the Escape having a more "solid" underbelly, look at both and support your claim! What was that comment all about? You are a "fellow" engineer, right? And I fail to see the weakness in the CRV.... if anything the CRV has the same under belly as the escape, if not more refined!!!!
To all the other Escape owners, I apologize for scapes2 over site of the obvious!
We both have great vehicles and he forgets what he states in his previous posts..
By the way, scape2 you make this site very entertaining and you make me want to figure out whether the Purdue or the Gold-n-Plump chicken breasts are better!!!