Last post on Oct 17, 2011 at 10:32 AM
You are in the Honda CR-V
What is this discussion about?
Honda CR-V, Car Buying, SUV
#36 of 45 2011 CR-V 4WD
Oct 13, 2011 (9:07 am)
I was almost convinced on buying a 2011 Honda CR-V (4WD) after test driving it and comparing it to Forester (seats too small), Rav4 AWD 6cyl (too noisy), Tiguan, Sportage, and Rogue. Then I saw this video demonstrating the Honda's 4WD system to other AWD systems Demo
Can anyone comment on their experience with a CR-V's 4WD system in the snow/ice?
#37 of 45 Re: 2011 CR-V 4WD [autobus]
Oct 15, 2011 (7:17 am)
Interesting video. Whether the test conditions recreate real world conditions is unknown, although they look reasonable to me. Not in doubt, however, is that the Subaru has a superior 4WD system compared its more popular competitors.
No one should buy a CR-V expecting performance up to serious off-road use or arctic winter driving conditions. Like others in its class, its a practical utility vehicle with a 4WD system intended for light duty use. It improves winter driving traction.
For normal every-day driving, I think the CR-V is the better choice. But if one expects to rely on winter driving capability, then I'd choose something else.
#38 of 45 Re: 2011 CR-V 4WD [autobus]
Oct 15, 2011 (11:57 am)
We currently own two CRV's. Both are 4WD. One is a 2003 and the other a 2011. We also had a 2000.
All have done fine in the snow without winter tires. For serious snow driving there may be better choices but our CRV's have always done the job.
Our son bought a new 2009 Subaru Impreza. He really felt confident and good to go until it snowed the first time. He got stuck on a hill unable to move and a RWD Miata went around him!!
The Miata belonged to a co-worker who gave credit to the Blizzak tires he had installed on all four wheels.
The next week, the Impreza got a set of Blizzaks too and a MAJOR, HUGE improvement was noted!
If I was forced to commute, I would throw a set of those on our 2003 CRV.
#39 of 45 Re: 2011 CR-V 4WD [isellhondas]
Oct 16, 2011 (8:14 am)
No doubt that good snows will help. I'm just wondering how effective the Honda CR-V "4WD" is. I'm considering a 2011 model and also considering a 2011 Subaru Outback. Thanks
#40 of 45 Re: 2011 CR-V 4WD [autobus]
Oct 16, 2011 (9:41 am)
As I said, ours have served us well.
A couple of years ago, it snowed so hard on my way to work I was ready to turn around but I kept going and it did just fine even going up a pretty steep hill without winter tires.
Could a different car do better? Perhaps, but I was pleased by the way ours have performed.
#41 of 45 Re: 2011 CR-V 4WD [autobus]
Oct 16, 2011 (2:29 pm)
Subarus have been snow-belt cars since they were first introduced in the 1970's. That was their initial niche.
All things the same (engine, transmission, tires) my bet would be that either the Subaru Forester or Outback would beat my wife's 2008 CR-V EX-L AWD in heavy snow (6 inches or more). That said, she's never gotten stuck in the winter on the country roads around St. Louis, MO, she really likes the CR-V's utility in carrying plants, and the dealership is only 5 miles away (vice 20 for the Subaru dealership). So it really comes down to what vehicle works best for you in day-to-day use, dealership distance, and the number of blizzards you drive through in a typical year.
#42 of 45 Re: Passenger obscures driver's right blind spot - what do you do? [idic5]
Oct 16, 2011 (2:48 pm)
I think several of the newer cars, including the CrossTour and CRV, look more sporty, but the manufacturers are doing the consumers a huge disservice by putting out these cars with compromised rear visability due to the sloping hood, small rear windows, and wide rear columns.
Just don't buy 'em! Or purchase an earlier model with larger windows.
#43 of 45 Re: Passenger obscures driver's right blind spot - what do you do? [hecko007]
Oct 17, 2011 (6:34 am)
This is called rollover protection.
You can't have both. Thin pillars and excellent rollover protection.
#44 of 45 Re: 2011 cr-v questions [isellhondas]
Oct 17, 2011 (9:47 am)
The 2011 CRV's went from 166 HP to 180. We have one of each and the 2011 is MUCH faster than the 2003. It's alos much quietier.
We have a 2005 CR-V EX 5 spd MAN, and 2010 CR-V EX 5 spd AUTO, and the 2005 is much more responsive, and actually faster according to all the car magazine tests than the 2010 with 180 hp.
It is the transmission that is holding the 2010 back. The most annoying, indecisive transmission. But, it is good for people who don't want to be bothered with driving which actually behind the wheel.
And as much as my wife insisted on buying her new car with atuomatic, she prefers diving mine, even when sitting in traffic. It is just a better driver's car, over all.
Yeah, 2010 is quieter, but means nothing when it is hassle to drive it.
#45 of 45 Re: 2011 cr-v questions [blueiedgod]
Oct 17, 2011 (10:32 am)
I've never found any of our CRV automatics to be "annoying" or "indecisive".
And, for the life of me, I can't understand how driving a 2010 CRV can be a "hassle" to drive?
The 5 speed CRV's were a dog to sell. As a large store, we tried to keep a couple on hand but unless you found that one person who had to have a stick, they just sat on the lot. Trying to sell a used 5 speed was even harder.
When they quit making 5 speeds it wasn't a surprise to anyone.
I'll drag race a 2005 5 speed with our 2011 ANY day!
Well....back when I was a street racer I was always getting in trouble so better not!