i gotta say, that cr-v looks pretty damn good!!! especially the wheels, stance and interiror, the nose is still iffy but still... i would definately put this in the win column.
Well, I don't know if you guys have noticed it, but in the engine pics, I think I could say without being mistaken that is an R series cover, certainly not a K20 iteration.
That said, being a CR-V, it can't be the R18 because it's too small for an SUV, even for Europe. So basically, I bet that you are looking at the second model in the world to use the R20 after the Stream.
Given the fact that it is a European model, it will also be the first one to be matted with a manual transmission. My only wonder is now what will they fit for the automatic, because I sure don't expect Honda to use CVT in an SUV !!!!
Anyway, no fears for Americans, this small 2.0L engine won't make it to your country. I would also be exceptical for Japan, since they already have the 2.4L version, a new model with a 2.0L would be something unseen in car making history for as much as I can remember. But at the same time, having the CR-V powered as the recently introduced Stream could make sense. Still, I think that they'll keep the same 2.4L engine as in NA.
I'm just glad that they decided to keep on with the 2.0L in Europe, and that they installed the R series that has superior fuel economy when compared with the K series. Still waiting to see if it is able to offer the same level of refinement than the K20 offers, or close to it. But I've been driving a 2.0L CR-V in Japan for a year and I certainly did not miss more power or torque, even with the 4 speed transmission that I hate (of course, some regular CR-V buyers may not appreciate to redline their cars when needed...)
When I first saw the spy pics I really didnt care for the new styling at all. Since then Ive seen it numerous times and as with most new Hondas, its looks are growing on me. I like the chunky solid styling along with the Volvo-esque lights at the rear.
It doesnt look puny like the 1st gen CRV and it looks more substantial than the current one. That rear quarter glass looks much better now as I can view the vehicle from different angles. It actually accents the design and adds a bit of flair. The wheel and tire combo looks better than the anorexic combos of past CRV's and Hondas in general.
The interior is kinda plain but it looks good and of course I like the dash mounted shifter. The only issue I have (going by the pic) is that the leather looks a bit grainy and early 90's Chrylser. But overall I like it a lot.
danielgr wrote: Well, I don't know if you guys have noticed it, but in the engine pics, I think I could say without being mistaken that is an R series cover, certainly not a K20 iteration.
That said, being a CR-V, it can't be the R18 because it's too small for an SUV, even for Europe. So basically, I bet that you are looking at the second model in the world to use the R20 after the Stream.
Given the fact that it is a European model, it will also be the first one to be matted with a manual transmission. My only wonder is now what will they fit for the automatic, because I sure don't expect Honda to use CVT in an SUV !!!!
Anyway, no fears for Americans, this small 2.0L engine won't make it to your country. I would also be exceptical for Japan, since they already have the 2.4L version, a new model with a 2.0L would be something unseen in car making history for as much as I can remember. But at the same time, having the CR-V powered as the recently introduced Stream could make sense. Still, I think that they'll keep the same 2.4L engine as in NA.
I'm just glad that they decided to keep on with the 2.0L in Europe, and that they installed the R series that has superior fuel economy when compared with the K series. Still waiting to see if it is able to offer the same level of refinement than the K20 offers, or close to it. But I've been driving a 2.0L CR-V in Japan for a year and I certainly did not miss more power or torque, even with the 4 speed transmission that I hate (of course, some regular CR-V buyers may not appreciate to redline their cars when needed...)
I doubt it will be as refined as the K20 unless they install balancer shafts. As it is, the R18 gets a little wobbly at higher rpms. In the "everyday" operating range the R18 is nice and smooth but it's a little bit boring all in all - more like a toyota motor than a honda engine (I've had a Fit all this week and I feel sort of the same way about the L15. It's great at part throttle and up to about 4000 rpms but above that it just makes more noise, vibrations, and not much more thrust. I hate to say it, but the L15's biggest strength may be its tiny packaging - otherwise I'm not overly impressed by it. The D15 that was in my '92 Civic LX probably lacked the low end torque of this motor but the top end response was a lot more fun - I loved revving that motor out and I could cruise all day at 80mph on the freeway and still pull ~40mpg and it would easily move the car to 60mph in the low-mid 8 second range. And it had surprisingly good passing power for a motor that was only rated at 102hp. I haven't run the numbers on the Fit yet but I'll be surprised if I see anything below 10seconds. I just did a 250 mile round trip in the Fit (5AT) and judging by the fuel gauge (about 3/16ths left) I'm guessing I may be lucky to have achieved 30mpg - I was hustling at 80-85mph for a lot of the way but this is a 5AT and even at 85mph it's only turning around 3200-3300 rpms. Well, we'll see. I have little difficulty getting 35+mpg in our project Si on the highway, with something like 140-150 more hp...
danielgr wrote: Well, I don't know if you guys have noticed it, but in the engine pics, I think I could say without being mistaken that is an R series cover, certainly not a K20 iteration.
That said, being a CR-V, it can't be the R18 because it's too small for an SUV, even for Europe. So basically, I bet that you are looking at the second model in the world to use the R20 after the Stream.
Given the fact that it is a European model, it will also be the first one to be matted with a manual transmission. My only wonder is now what will they fit for the automatic, because I sure don't expect Honda to use CVT in an SUV !!!!
Anyway, no fears for Americans, this small 2.0L engine won't make it to your country. I would also be exceptical for Japan, since they already have the 2.4L version, a new model with a 2.0L would be something unseen in car making history for as much as I can remember. But at the same time, having the CR-V powered as the recently introduced Stream could make sense. Still, I think that they'll keep the same 2.4L engine as in NA.
I'm just glad that they decided to keep on with the 2.0L in Europe, and that they installed the R series that has superior fuel economy when compared with the K series. Still waiting to see if it is able to offer the same level of refinement than the K20 offers, or close to it. But I've been driving a 2.0L CR-V in Japan for a year and I certainly did not miss more power or torque, even with the 4 speed transmission that I hate (of course, some regular CR-V buyers may not appreciate to redline their cars when needed...)
Just for the record, it seems that I was right when wondering.
CivicB18 wrote: When I first saw the spy pics I really didnt care for the new styling at all. Since then Ive seen it numerous times and as with most new Hondas, its looks are growing on me. I like the chunky solid styling along with the Volvo-esque lights at the rear.
It doesnt look puny like the 1st gen CRV and it looks more substantial than the current one. That rear quarter glass looks much better now as I can view the vehicle from different angles. It actually accents the design and adds a bit of flair. The wheel and tire combo looks better than the anorexic combos of past CRV's and Hondas in general.
The interior is kinda plain but it looks good and of course I like the dash mounted shifter. The only issue I have (going by the pic) is that the leather looks a bit grainy and early 90's Chrylser. But overall I like it a lot.
Patrick
The first time you see it in person I think you'll really be convinced. I was surprised at all the negative responses when the vancouver spyshots came out.
I'M EATING sauted CROWwith MASHED roasted red potatoes and buttered green beans. I don't eat crow often but in this case I have to. Nice job Honda I like it. It looks squat, nimble and fast. It seems to have function and an agressive stance. If it preforms as good as it looks then I will be inviting a lot of TOV nuts over for CROW. That looks like some mini ute. Toyota say bye to RAV sales!
The overall styling is excellent. Something that stands out, however, "stands out" and that I wish didn't. The top portion of the grill ends abruptly and provides a weird appearance to me. Other than that, there is nothing to even remotely complain about this CR-V.
Thanks again!! Those are great pictures from Europe. Of course they would have blinkers on the side mirrors and headlights washers too. Oh well, they also pay so much more than we do in the States. The car is simply beautiful outside and inside. It is really several steps above the current model and I like the current model. For a car that Honda was so reluctant to release to the rest of the world it sure has done a brilliant job.
danielgr wrote: Well, I don't know if you guys have noticed it, but in the engine pics, I think I could say without being mistaken that is an R series cover, certainly not a K20 iteration.
That said, being a CR-V, it can't be the R18 because it's too small for an SUV, even for Europe. So basically, I bet that you are looking at the second model in the world to use the R20 after the Stream.
Given the fact that it is a European model, it will also be the first one to be matted with a manual transmission. My only wonder is now what will they fit for the automatic, because I sure don't expect Honda to use CVT in an SUV !!!!
Anyway, no fears for Americans, this small 2.0L engine won't make it to your country. I would also be exceptical for Japan, since they already have the 2.4L version, a new model with a 2.0L would be something unseen in car making history for as much as I can remember. But at the same time, having the CR-V powered as the recently introduced Stream could make sense. Still, I think that they'll keep the same 2.4L engine as in NA.
I'm just glad that they decided to keep on with the 2.0L in Europe, and that they installed the R series that has superior fuel economy when compared with the K series. Still waiting to see if it is able to offer the same level of refinement than the K20 offers, or close to it. But I've been driving a 2.0L CR-V in Japan for a year and I certainly did not miss more power or torque, even with the 4 speed transmission that I hate (of course, some regular CR-V buyers may not appreciate to redline their cars when needed...)
I doubt it will be as refined as the K20 unless they install balancer shafts. As it is, the R18 gets a little wobbly at higher rpms. In the "everyday" operating range the R18 is nice and smooth but it's a little bit boring all in all - more like a toyota motor than a honda engine (I've had a Fit all this week and I feel sort of the same way about the L15. It's great at part throttle and up to about 4000 rpms but above that it just makes more noise, vibrations, and not much more thrust. I hate to say it, but the L15's biggest strength may be its tiny packaging - otherwise I'm not overly impressed by it. The D15 that was in my '92 Civic LX probably lacked the low end torque of this motor but the top end response was a lot more fun - I loved revving that motor out and I could cruise all day at 80mph on the freeway and still pull ~40mpg and it would easily move the car to 60mph in the low-mid 8 second range. And it had surprisingly good passing power for a motor that was only rated at 102hp. I haven't run the numbers on the Fit yet but I'll be surprised if I see anything below 10seconds. I just did a 250 mile round trip in the Fit (5AT) and judging by the fuel gauge (about 3/16ths left) I'm guessing I may be lucky to have achieved 30mpg - I was hustling at 80-85mph for a lot of the way but this is a 5AT and even at 85mph it's only turning around 3200-3300 rpms. Well, we'll see. I have little difficulty getting 35+mpg in our project Si on the highway, with something like 140-150 more hp...
Well, it depends on where are you comparing Jeff.
Clearly now we are talking about R20 and K20 so I'll save my comments until I've driven both.
But with respects to the R18, I don't feel it is less refined or has less high end power than any other past gen SOHC VTEC engines. If you compare it with the D17 I think it is clearly an improvement on most areas if not all. There was also a SOHC VTEC 1.8L (137Hp) engine that may have never made it to the US, which powered the past gen Accord in Europe. I would say more of the same, except that the mentioned engine used same fuel as a K20, and that the R18 uses about the same as our past gen D16 Civic in Europe.
In any case, despite most people wanting to link the VTEC name to some kind of "performance idea", you know Jeff that the R series is mainly focused on fuel economy, and by the hearings of most people in this forum I think that it delivers a great one (I have not had it long enough to see any fuel economy myself). Ratings for the Stream are also quite good, with the Stream R20 matted to the CVT delivering the same fuel economy (on paper) as the R18 matted with the 5AT.
On the other hand, maybe Europeans are not so picky with engine refinement (after all they most of them buy diesels without thining it twice), and also, as I said before, most people buying SUV hardly ever push their engines to redline, so as long as trust and refinement is good in the low-mid range, they'll be happy with the better fuel economy (that may also justify the new Civic still using the K20 in the 2.0L range).
That reminds me I read yesterday the first fully featured comparo in the Stream class. All the japanese competition from Mazda, Nissan, and Toyota was there, all of them boosting DOHC engines in both 1.8L class and 2.0L class. In pure japanese fashion there were two points of view, one feminin and one masculin. Both end it up giving great honours to the Stream, with the male chosing Mazda in second place, and the female chosing Nissan for runer-up.
As for personal experience: I just came back from a 3000Km trip to Hokkaido in the K20 CR-V, with 4 people on board + luggage & Air Conditioning. Our average fuel economy was 9.5L/100Km (10.6Km/L) while driving most of the time on the highway and open roads between 75 (Highway) and 50 mph (normal roads). I don't know what kind of milleage is that for an American, but for me it's pretty sad. At those speeds I could get around mid 6L/100Km in past gen D16 powered Euro Civic. Of course I am new to the SUV world, but I still think that we could have taken everything in a Euro/JP 5door hatch and do the same trip with around 20 - 30% better fuel economy. That's a huge gap, and I'll be more than happy if they make it smaller, no matter how much I actually love this car (it's simply great for this kind of trip!!!!).
About the Fit, I would say that there are two main reasons why you don't get such a good fuel economy on the Fit at 80-85mph.
- First one is that American 5AT seems clearly more oriented to performance than fuel economy, and clearly the Fit engine was designed to work with the JP CVT transmission. Adapting things in the last moment is never as good as thinking them from the begining, even from Honda. Just take a comparison between JP ratings with CVT vs the Civic, and you find ratings from 18.6Km/L to 20.5 Km/L in the Fit (depending versions) vs. 17Km/L in the AT Civic. Clearly there is something not so fine with the transmission-engine combination in the US since ratings for the Civic are better than those for the Fit. But for sure Honda people may have thought that it was "good enough" for American standards. I would bet next gen US-Fit will have better fuel economy than the Civic.
- Second is that at those speeds, key factor is aero, and the Fit has a rather tall body and poor drag efficency when compared with both of the cars you've mentioned.
Then, just a couple of questions: - Was it (the LX) manual or automatic? I asume it was manual.
- How was the last time you drove your LX?
I don't think that there is anything wrong with the L15, just that you are not making fair comparissons. - LX weight was 200lb lighter than the Fit.
- LX and Fit have comparable width but Fit is 6" taller (10% more front area).
- LX engine was clearly not set to meet the emissions standards than the Fit's is.
- Comparing automatic to manual cars isn't fair, nor for performance nor for fuel economy.
- Also, comparing your memories of a car that you use to drive 10 years ago with the new ones isn't fair (you used past tense on all your comments, so I guess that you don't drive it anymore). Because most of the time our impression in cars is comparative, and clearly you are now driving Project Si's and S2000 that you may not have been driving at the time of your LX. As always it depends on from where you are coming. People that have never driven a performance Honda steps up in the new Fit and says that he can feel "the VTEC" and that this thing rocks to the redline like a missile (of course they don't know what they are talking about). It would be nice if you could drive them (your old LX and the Fit) side by side.
But the thing is that the engine still pulls effortless to the redline (not rocks on it), where as engines from other automakers (like Toyota's) have to be begged to get there. To me the trust on the higher rpm range is there (well, actually at lower rpm's than your old LX), the problem may be that you don't notice so much of a change because now the lower part has been filled. Apparently you liked the change, but clearly for modern driving styles most people appreciate having strong low-end torque, no matter how much the engine is willing to rev afterwards.
As long as they keep it revving without pain, everything is ok for me.
*Jeff*, the L15 is certainly no K-series engine, but it's pretty smooth. It's torkey at low rpm and it pulls nicely to about 6000 rpm. There appears to be a sweet spot around 4000 rpm - perhaps it's VTEC? It gets a bit noisy at high rpms and feels slightly out of breath near 6000 rpm.
Then again, my Fit is equipped with the sport muffler and the manual transmission... I wonder how much of a difference that makes.
I'm definitely not getting the advertised mpg with my Fit! Maybe it's because of my spirited driving, maybe it's because of the wider HFP tires (pressure is fine). I'm really not sure - then again I'm not exactly keeping track (yet).
Perhaps the L15 is just not a very efficient engine design (for a Honda), but it's small and light.
Yeah, I wish they have retained the current implementation..., that was one of the greatest ideas I've ever seen to place the always unpractical hand brake... Zero space used, seemlessly integrated in the the design, and just loved to use it like if it was an airplane joystick !!!!
But well, it looks as if it is still possible to fold down the centre console without problems so if that's the case...
Wizard wrote: The overall styling is excellent. Something that stands out, however, "stands out" and that I wish didn't. The top portion of the grill ends abruptly and provides a weird appearance to me. Other than that, there is nothing to even remotely complain about this CR-V.
Incredible how things have changed since the first spy pics that happened to be exactly what we are seeing now...
It was funny, I was reading post on the forums where this pics were found and there was this girl poster (something not so common in car forums): "I love it !!!" is all she said... I wonder if in the end many people will end up liking this CR-V...
HONDA AFVM wrote: I'M EATING sauted CROWwith MASHED roasted red potatoes and buttered green beans. I don't eat crow often but in this case I have to. Nice job Honda I like it. It looks squat, nimble and fast. It seems to have function and an agressive stance. If it preforms as good as it looks then I will be inviting a lot of TOV nuts over for CROW. That looks like some mini ute. Toyota say bye to RAV sales!
Don't take me wrong, but I was just wondering if you are trying to convince people that the new CR-V style is great because you now see that it is definitive and that you'll be selling them, or if you have really changed your opinion soooo much:
Yeah, I wish they have retained the current implementation..., that was one of the greatest ideas I've ever seen to place the always unpractical hand brake... Zero space used, seemlessly integrated in the the design, and just loved to use it like if it was an airplane joystick !!!!
But well, it looks as if it is still possible to fold down the centre console without problems so if that's the case...
Wizard wrote: The overall styling is excellent. Something that stands out, however, "stands out" and that I wish didn't. The top portion of the grill ends abruptly and provides a weird appearance to me. Other than that, there is nothing to even remotely complain about this CR-V.
Incredible how things have changed since the first spy pics that happened to be exactly what we are seeing now...
It was funny, I was reading post on the forums where this pics were found and there was this girl poster (something not so common in car forums): "I love it !!!" is all she said... I wonder if in the end many people will end up liking this CR-V...
I hope this doesn't push the limits of the embargo too far but let me say that a lot of people came up to talk to us when we were driving the CR-V and the overall reaction was 100% different than what I've seen from the online community. I've probably been guilty of this but I think people are too quick to judge based upon some candid shots.
HONDA AFVM wrote: I'M EATING sauted CROWwith MASHED roasted red potatoes and buttered green beans. I don't eat crow often but in this case I have to. Nice job Honda I like it. It looks squat, nimble and fast. It seems to have function and an agressive stance. If it preforms as good as it looks then I will be inviting a lot of TOV nuts over for CROW. That looks like some mini ute. Toyota say bye to RAV sales!
Don't take me wrong, but I was just wondering if you are trying to convince people that the new CR-V style is great because you now see that it is definitive and that you'll be selling them, or if you have really changed your opinion soooo much:
I have reallllllly changed my mind. Until I see it I will won't be satisfied.
In the case of selling them, YES, it is a product I sell and I want to be proud of what I sell and how it serves the customers that buy them.
I expect to sell every car on my lot and if it doesn't sell it makes Honda, the dealerships and me look bad and nobody wants that. I hope the job you have expects you do sell, fix, figure out, market everything you can, as fast and the best you can. Well, the same is expexted of us, to sell our product. So if you understand that then were cool.
HONDA AFVM wrote: I'M EATING sauted CROWwith MASHED roasted red potatoes and buttered green beans. I don't eat crow often but in this case I have to. Nice job Honda I like it. It looks squat, nimble and fast. It seems to have function and an agressive stance. If it preforms as good as it looks then I will be inviting a lot of TOV nuts over for CROW. That looks like some mini ute. Toyota say bye to RAV sales!
Don't take me wrong, but I was just wondering if you are trying to convince people that the new CR-V style is great because you now see that it is definitive and that you'll be selling them, or if you have really changed your opinion soooo much:
I have reallllllly changed my mind. Until I see it I will won't be satisfied.
In the case of selling them, YES, it is a product I sell and I want to be proud of what I sell and how it serves the customers that buy them.
I expect to sell every car on my lot and if it doesn't sell it makes Honda, the dealerships and me look bad and nobody wants that. I hope the job you have expects you do sell, fix, figure out, market everything you can, as fast and the best you can. Well, the same is expexted of us, to sell our product. So if you understand that then were cool.
I also can't stress that the forums you so effectively hunted down to try what ever your trying to prove about me also inclued that I have a CRV and can't move into a smaller one and I was very disapointed in a smaller CRV. According to the new figures it seems to be close to the same size and that is a BIG selling it to my wife factor.
Your entitled to your opinion but I feel the opposite is true. Honda has removed any pretences of off-roading from this Gen 3 CRV. The Gen 2 looked the most rugged IMHO.
revvin wrote: sexy might be an overstatement. seems the crv has its own ideas about a design theme, nevermind hondas own.
nevertheless, here are the pics.
Well, I´m still not sure about the front end, but on this picture the car looks really...really good.
Just install 18"s or 19"s rims and voila!!!!
Overall I think it looks good as well (much more upscale), but for some reason I can't get over the front end. It looks like two different people designed it (one the hood/emblem/headlights and another the front bumper). If it could only flow together a little better.
Honda just killed the RDX with the new CR-V. I was seriously considering a new RDX (especially with the new least rates at $399/month), but the new CR-V has just won me over.
Our "smiling grille" gets chrome details on the horizontal lead edges making it really stand out.
foiled again...
I just don't understand it...Honda depends on the US for a large percentage of its profits and yet we get shafted.
Nah, the thing is that you pay for a CR-V built in Swindon (UK) between 20400 and 25500$, where as in the UK they pay from 35000$ to 44000$, and in Europe between 32000 and 39000$.
Sure there is the tax difference, but not only that.
Sure also Honda in the US has some kind of a a pedestrian image, helped also by the fact that upscale models are marketed under the Acura Brand (which we don't have in Europe / Japan although we have some of the Acura models). Honda brand is building a more upscale image in Europe, and it has to show up somewhere appart on the price.
![[home]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/home.gif){kind=small}
![[rumors and news]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/rumors.gif){kind=small}
![[model release matrix]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/newmodelreleasematrix.gif){kind=small}
![[dealer network]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/dealernet.gif){kind=small}
![[desktop calendar]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/calendar.gif){kind=small}
![[exhaust notes]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/exhaust.gif){kind=small}
![[tov forums]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/forums.gif){kind=small}
![[links]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/links.gif){kind=small}
![[search]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/search.gif){kind=small}
![[sponsors]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/sponsors.gif){kind=small}
![[garage]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/garage.gif){kind=small}
![[login]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/login.gif){kind=small}
