Ask the Car People.SM


CR-V vs Escape

8533 messages,  Last post on Nov 22, 2011 at 3:06 PM

You are in the Ford Escape Forum.

What is this discussion about? Honda CR-V, Ford Escape, Car Safety, Fuel Efficiency (MPG), SUV

Messages Page 852 of 854

#8510 of 8533 Re: Escape styling? [motoguy128] by chuckfromli

Sep 14, 2009 (10:32 am)

Replying to: motoguy128 (Sep 14, 2009 10:23 am)
I guess beauty is really in the eye of the beholder, as I prefer the Escapes looks to the CRV. I like the SUV look.
 
What do you mean by "interior flexibility". I know that the rear window on the Escape can be opened independently of the rear door, something the CRV and RAV4 don't have. This has been useful to me on Pathfinder for carrying long things like mouldings and 2 x 4s from Home Depot, or taking things to the dump. It's just added flexibility.
 
I am sure it doesn't stop or handle lke a Honda.

#8511 of 8533 Re: Escape styling? [motoguy128] by stevedebi

Sep 14, 2009 (12:36 pm)

Replying to: motoguy128 (Sep 14, 2009 10:23 am)
"Nope. the Escape looks like a Mini Ford Explorer...and thats's not a compliment. It' a little ugly box. Sorry. That's the extent of my cross shopping. Also, on the spec sheet, it doesn't have as much interior flexibility as the CR-V. The upgraded pwoertrains are at least a big step forward. "
 
I owned a gen2 CR-V, and I liked the car. However, when it came time to buy new, I simply hated the styling of the Gen3, and I like the classic styling of the Escape. That "boxy shape" provides a much more usable interior over the rounded shapes of the other vehicles. And I also like the separate glass window opening instead of a fixed rear window.
 
But then I am a person who puts functionality over style (although I like the Escape style).

#8512 of 8533 Dimensions by motoguy128

Sep 15, 2009 (8:58 am)

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.

#8513 of 8533 Re: Dimensions [motoguy128] by stevedebi

Sep 15, 2009 (12:59 pm)

Replying to: motoguy128 (Sep 15, 2009 8:58 am)
"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. "
 
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.

#8514 of 8533 Re: Dimensions [motoguy128] by explorerx4

Sep 15, 2009 (2:32 pm)

Replying to: motoguy128 (Sep 15, 2009 8:58 am)
cr-v may have more room, but the escape is fine for 99%. i am over 6 ft and have sat in the front and rear of the escape for extended periods of time. i do not have any physical space issues.
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.

#8515 of 8533 Re: Dimensions [explorerx4] by motoguy128

Sep 16, 2009 (7:43 am)

Replying to: explorerx4 (Sep 15, 2009 2:32 pm)
EPA figurs are only meant as a tool to compare 2 vehicles. In "highway" driving, I beat the CR-V's EPA rating by 13%, but in my extreme city driving (average speed of about 15mph), I get 10-15% lower mileage. My '03 Toyota Corolla beat its EPA highway numbers as well, but in my city driving, it was almsot 30% below the EPA rating.
 
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.

#8516 of 8533 Re: Dimensions [motoguy128] by stevedebi

Sep 16, 2009 (8:39 am)

Replying to: motoguy128 (Sep 16, 2009 7:43 am)
"It's clear we both prefer our respective vehciles. "
 
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.

#8517 of 8533 Re: Dimensions [stevedebi] by motoguy128

Sep 16, 2009 (11:32 am)

Replying to: stevedebi (Sep 16, 2009 8:39 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.
 
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.

#8518 of 8533 Re: Dimensions [motoguy128] by vg33e power

Sep 16, 2009 (11:54 am)

Replying to: motoguy128 (Sep 16, 2009 11:32 am)
I own a 2004 Ford Escape Limited. When my wife and I were shopping for her vehicle we test drove the CR-V as well from 2004. Its clear which SUV won. I also like the looks of the 2005-2007 Escape better then our 2001-2004 generation (front styling for the most part). The 2008 and up Escape is also nice but it "looks" a little bit less rugged and more gussied up bling-bling type of style. The current CR-V also looks very nice all around until you get to the front nose part...what was Honda thinking?? In fact what is Honda thinking in many of their vehicles when it comes to design?? Accord? It once used to be a very nice all around vehicle, perhaps a benchmark for family sedans, but now I beleive it lost by a lot on the styling department, the Accord is just plain ugly IMO. The Element is ugly, except for the SC model, the Pilot front end got slapped with the ugly stick as well. Also, the entire Acura line-up is just butt-ugly to nicely put it. Honda may still have the edge on fit, finish and reliability, but they are loossing ground big time in styling.

#8519 of 8533 What was Honda thinking by sr146260211

Sep 16, 2009 (12:50 pm)

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.
 
   

Messages Page 852 of 854

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement