xioix

That 4 cyl didn't help it win the MPG category, doubt a V6 would help it there

Joeb427

iTrader: (1)

The Accord's 19/29 MPG is very good and even with AWD in a CR-V would be very close to the RAV4 V6 19/26 mileage if Honda can somehow extend the hood a few inches and have the 6 cyl.
The CR-V is the best selling SUV in it's class in the US.So Honda is sitting only with the four.
Last week I just looked at both in top trim for the wife and the CR-V is much better quality interior wise and more solid overall feel and look.
Not buying either one,though.
Buying out our '09 RX lease.

memasterac

I doubt it... CR-V failed in the exterior aesthetic department badly.

Joeb427

iTrader: (1)

Nice aesthetics or not.
#1 small suv in sales in the US.
People buy it.
RAV and CR-V are usually #1 on many lists.

ivanz

I looked at a RAV4 a couple months back, and I quickly removed it from my list. Interior was plain cheap and had vast expanses solid colour plastic, with a design that looks like it was targeted at a teenager. All the buttons and ***** look like they were put on as an afterthought and really made it look ugly IMO.
The seats felt like they belonged in a Kio Rio, and were just uncomfortable and unsupportive.
Exterior was decent, but nothing that made it stand out or even look like it fit into that price category.
The sounds system was on par with something I had on an 88 Civic, and it felt like they cut corners everywhere.
Handling was sloppy and had very little road feel. I guess the top of the line one adds some better tires + mods to made it a bit better. V6 was nice, but pretty rough an unrefined. Having the Lexus GS 350, I know it will be a gas consumption pig in traffic like the Lexus is here (16-18L/100km city).
I tested a V6 base...I'm guessing the limited version probably might have some better options/addons.

LexFather

The Rav4 is maybe the only Toyota that really dominates its segment like old Toyotas used to. The V-6 is basically as fuel efficient as a CR-V I-4 for example. Tons of storage, nice interior (its no Tiguan inside), good looks, handles fine.

Good win for Toyota here.

IS-SV

Agreed, I like the look of the CRV which easily outsells the rest too.

(Cj)

I think the CRV is a prime example that people just buy "Hondas" because their Hondas. The CRV is consistently midpack or dead last in every comparo, but it continues to sell like hotcakes...

Same can be said of some Toyotas like the Corolla and Camry.

What doesn't make sense to me is that Honda is a company with no real trucks and traditionally known for it's small cars, but they dominate crossover and minivan sales in every category that they compete in

SLegacy99

I've never understood why the CR V has sold so well. It has never looked good, it has always had the slow 2.4, painstakingly dragging you to 60 MPH, fuel economy is subpar as is the 4WD.


Subaru needs a MT Forester XT along with choice of CVT as well as maybe the 3.6L H6. The Forester XT has never exactly set records. Im not so sure that a turbo is the best option for this vehicle from a marketing standpoint. I would opt for it, but I'm inclined to 4 cylinders.

mmarshall

I have to agree. The RAV-4 has a slick drivetrain and a decent chassis, but the interior plastics and textures don't impress me. Neither do the interiors of several other recent Toyota products.

mmarshall

The CR-V sells because of its assembly quality and materials, arguably the best in its class.

mmarshall

True...it doesn't drive particularly well, but the assembly quality and materials are so good it literally seduces.


Subaru had a MT XT Forester with the last-generation model, and dropped it because of poor sales.....only some 4% of the Forester market.

mmarshall

BTW, guys, did any of you check out the comments that the Car and Driver readers posted at the end of the article? I thought most of them were excellent.

memasterac

People buy CR-V because it's Honda, the same people buy Corolla because it's Toyota. These models are the top selling of its segment. People buy them and don't care about how good or bad they look.

I noticed there are increasing amount of CL members do not like most of Honda/Acura newer vehicles because the ugly exterior trend. I am of course one of them.

In this comparison they are some other good SUVs. These SUVs may not have CR-V's built quality but excelled in many other areas. 25 more HP or 6 cylinders is not enough to top the CR-V on the list, at least not from C&D judges IMO.

Fizzboy7

I am with you on that. I liked the exterior design and running gear, but the interior was too toyish and unrefined. Trying to find a smaller SUV that is grown up or classy and not too expensive is difficult. I was also let down by the lack of manual shifting with the automatic. I am sure the next gen will get it.