Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
SUVs Honda CR-V CR-V vs Escape
8531 messages, Last post on Sep 25, 2009 at 4:41 PM
You are in the Honda CR-V Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester
|
|
|---|---|
|
The Escape has less cargo room, less passenger interior volume, significantly less legroom in the rear... despite weighing about the same. The new 2.5L is an improvement, but the revised Honda 2.4L comming in the 2010 model makes even more power. although some of that cargo volume comes from a deeper cargo area since the rear seat flip forward rather than folding forward creating a flat load floor. The 4WD 4 cylinder Escape still gets 2mpg city and highway despite having a 6 speed automatic. Ford must use more of a full-time 4WD system whereas Honda, Toyota and Nissan use more of a part time system. I suppose it is personal preference. I like my CUV's rounded and sleek so long as they don't sacrifice interior room. The CR-V doesn't. But I am biased.
|
|
|
Replying to: motoguy128 (Sep 15, 2009 7:58 am) And my 2008 Escape Hybrid AWD gets 30 MPG in town, about 32 on the road here on LA freeways. An FWD will get 35 in town... although it is more expensive that the CR-V. But there is no high mileage option available on the CR-V. You are correct about Ford use of AWD; it kicks in to enhance performance and handling even on dry roads. Ford calls it "intelligent", whatever that means. "I suppose it is personal preference. I like my CUV's rounded and sleek so long as they don't sacrifice interior room. The CR-V doesn't. But I am biased." It is personal preference (I hate the CR-V Gen3 front end), but I have to disagree with you on the sacrifice of interior room. The Gen3 would have been HUGELY larger inside if they had kept the rear in the "box" configuration. The vehicle is larger in all dimensions outside than the Gen2, but about the same inside. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: motoguy128 (Sep 15, 2009 7:58 am) based on the new epa ratings, with our 04' escape we are averaging 7% over (epa 18, us 19+). the 09 is averaging over 15% above the epa rating (epa 20, us 23 and should go higher as it breaks in). also, the escape has gotten quiet, which the cr-v has not.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: explorerx4 (Sep 15, 2009 1:32 pm) For 2010 the CR-V is gaining 1mpg highway and city, and is expected to be a little quieter as well. It's clear we both prefer our respective vehciles.
|
|
|
Replying to: motoguy128 (Sep 16, 2009 6:43 am) It is interesting about the interior room. When I shopped the Escape, I had to move the seat FORWARD because I had too much legroom for comfort. I am 6' tall. In the CR-V I did not have as much room, although there was more room in the rear of the CR-V. But as you said, we prefer our respective vehicles. For me the shape of the Gen3 and that ugly nose were deal killers.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: stevedebi (Sep 16, 2009 7:39 am) But as you said, we prefer our respective vehicles. For me the shape of the Gen3 and that ugly nose were deal killers. The combined frot nand rear legroom numbrs are still higher for the CR-V, so even iff you could move hte front seat 1" further back, it would still have more total legroom. I do wish Honda had mounted it another 1/2" or 1" back. I wouldn't mind 1 more "notch". Funny, I had the same sentiments about Escape's front end. Well not ugly, jsut rather boring. The explorer styling just seems so tired. It just reminds me of the 1980 and 90's too much. WHich si unfortunalte because I know Ford makes dramatically better vehciles than it did in the 80's and 90's... actually most are now equal or better than the competition... but I don't want anything to remind me of it's ugly past. I actually preferrd the previous genration Escape styling bett.er I wish they would have just modernized it's headlights and grill rather than making it a mini explorer. But I think they wanted to futher seperate it from it's Mazda roots. Which is funny, because the best looking and best designed vehciles Ford has are based on Mazda or joint designs. The CR-V is a little unusual and awkward looking from some angles, but I love hte side and bakc profiles and styling. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: motoguy128 (Sep 16, 2009 10:32 am)
|
|
|
|
|
I had a choice between a 2007 Accord and the new arrival 2008 Accord a few short years back and preferred the 08 way more then the 07. Looks is of course are subjective and I can care less what others think of a front end looks or what ever, of any car, as long as I like it. As far as what was Honda thinking with the new style ? I think they are doing just fine. Others, many others for the numbers that buy them over some other brand, think the same way. 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: sr146260211 (Sep 16, 2009 11:50 am) 1. No choice if they want a brand new Accord 2. Reliability reputation 3. Because its a Honda 4. Interior room 5. Comfortableness I really doubt that the styling is high on their roster, because subjective or not there are many people (including myself) and professional reviews (Edmunds, KBB, Motor Trend, etc.) that think the styling of the current generation (frog eyed) Accords is a step backwards from the last generation instead of an improvement. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: motoguy128 (Sep 16, 2009 10:32 am) look at the front end of a current Tahoe and the hybrid version.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
SUVs Honda CR-V CR-V vs Escape
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Honda CR-V
2010 Ford Escape
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
