Condensed Review: 2010 Honda Crosstour
03-11-10, 01:54 PM
#1
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Condensed Review: 2010 Honda Crosstour
A Condensed Review of the of the 2010 Honda Crosstour.
http://automobiles.honda.com/accord-crosstour/
In a Nutshell: Honda-Accord quality inside and out, a good Subaru competitor, but with several marketing/design goofs.
I did not receive any specific CL or non-CL requests for a Crosstour review, but, for a number of reasons, decided to review and test-drive it anyway. I know that many of you in CL have sharp opinions about it, both pro and con....this was brought out in some earlier Crosstour discussion threads. I'm coming up on my usual 5-year replacement cycle on a new car, and, while another Subaru is a strong possibility, I don't want to ignore the competition either. As with the competing Toyota Venza (which, as of this writing, is, of course, caught up in Toyota's throttle/floor-mat problems and the endless media blitz), the Crosstour is Honda's first real Subaru AWD passenger-car competition in many years. Honda, sadly, has not sold an AWD passenger-car in the American market since the tall Civic AWD wagon of the 1980's, relying first on rebadged Isuzu SUVs and, later, the Honda-designed CR-V and Pilot SUVs. Toyota, of course, had the AWD Matrix (and the rebadged Pontiac Vibe AWD, the same car), but it did not sell in the numbers that the regular FWD models did. Toyota, like Honda, until recently, relied mostly on SUVs for their AWD vehicles.
The ubiquitous Honda Accord line, of course, was introduced to America in 1976, and has been here ever since. With the possible exception of the Toyota Camry (introduced in 1983-84), perhaps no other sedan has so completely captured the minds and hearts of the American public as the Accord. Its incredible sales success, and its iron-clad establishment in the American market, speaks for itself. It has been on the 10 Best List of Car and Driver magazine for over 20 years, and on Consumer Reports' Recommended or Top Pick List even longer than that. It has see-sawed with, or just trailed, the Toyota Camry for Best-Selling car status, again, for over 20 years (in the early 1990's, the Ford Taurus was also a big player). So, since its history in America is so well-established and documented, I won't go into all the details here, except to say that the popularity of the Accord sedan was (and is) so huge that even the coupe and wagon models couldn't really compete, and the wagons were dropped in the mid-90s.
I never liked the fact, though, that the Accord wagons were dropped, and that an AWD version was never offered here in the American market that would compete with Subarus. Until now, that is. Following on the heels of the introduction of Toyota's FWD/AWD Venza wagon last year, we FINALLY, after all these years, have an AWD, lift-back Accord with a raised-suspension that can compete, at least on paper, with the Subaru Outbacks, which have pretty much dominated this market. So, as with the Venza, even without any formal review requests, I had to check this car out.
I saw it at the D.C. Auto Show, of course, in late January, and, as with most Honda products, I was impressed with the materials and assembly-quality inside and out....it shows the usual Honda dedication to quality materials and laser-like assembly precision. The rear end, though, is poorly-done, with an awkward appearance, with VERY poor rear-vision from a rear window-cross-bar, small rear-quarter peep-windows, and impeding rear headrests. It also forces the spare tire outside, underneath the rear of the car, inside a cover. The rear-end has gotten a lot of negative comments in CL chat, and, while styling, of course, is a subjective matter, some of those criticisms, IMO, from a practical point, are valid. Others, IMO, are not.
For 2010, three versions of the Crosstour are offered in the American market, FWD/AWD EX models and an AWD EX-L. No cheaper DX or LX models are offered, as with some other Hondas......a marketing goof, IMO. That, of course, forces the pricing of all versions pretty much at or above 30K (FWD EX models start at $29,670). You won't find any mid-high 20's models like with the Outback. Nor will you find any four-cylinder, manual-transmission, or CVT versions either, like with the Outback...though that may not be a bad thing, since the Crosstour's size and AWD weight/drag blunts even the V6's performance....I'm not sure a four-banger could handle this load. The standard (and only) Crosstour engine is the ubiquitous 3.5L Honda/Acura v6 with 3-cylinder cruise-decativation, with 281 HP and 254 ft-lbs. of torque in Crosstour application. The only transmission offered is a smooth-shifting 5-speed automatic that lacks both a D4 downshift and a separate sport/manual-shift gate...the downshifts are D3, 2, and 1. Though the literature/specs on this are unclear, this seems to be a strictly AWD-on-Demand system, and apparantly is not the same type of AWD as the SH-AWD found on Honda's sister Acura products.
Inside, cloth or leather is offered on the FWD, but only leather on the AWD models.....another marketing goof, IMO, as the cloth seats are both comfortable/supportive and hold you in MUCH better than the slippery, slide-prone leather seats. The leather is mandatory on AWD models. 17" wheels come on the EX.......18" on the EX-L, which, IMO, seemed larger than necessary and were almost as large as the gross 19 and 20" wheels on the Toyota Venza.
Unlike most of my reviews, my interest in this car was personal as well as simply done for review purposes. I had a lot of interest in this car for a reason, looking upon it as a possible (if not very likely) next-purchase for myself. It is the best Subaru competitor (nothwithstanding the poorly-done rear end) that Honda has come up with in many years, and equals or beats Subaru in some aspects of build/material quality. But I also want to take a good look at the upcoming Acura TSX Sportwagon, as it promises equal build quality with a far more sensible, more-conventional rear end.
I static-examined a couple of different versions of the Crosstour, but, for the test-drive, I chose the model I would be most interested in....an AWD EX-L with a nice light-green/gray Opal Sage paint job and Ivory interior. I preferred the cloth, of course, but the leather is standard with AWD. Since I was doing this review pretty much for myself, and did not get any formal requests for it, I'll just list the PLUSSES and MINUSES I found, and skip the usual long, narrative review I do for each section. If any of you have a specific questions about anything on the vehicle in particular (other than what I've already mentioned), just ask......I'll answer them in specific detail.
Model Reviewed: 2010 Honda Crosstour EX-L 4WD (AWD)
Base Price: $34,020
Options: None
Destination/Freight: $710
List Price as Reviewed: $34,730
Drivetrain: On-demand AWD, Transverse-mounted 3.5L SOHC I-VTEC V6, 271 HP @ 6200 RPM, Torque 254 Ft-lbs. @ 5000 RPM, 5-speed automatic.
EPA Mileage Rating: 17 City, 25 Highway (AWD) / 18 City. 27 Highway (FWD)
Exterior Color: Opal Sage
Interior: Ivory Leather.
PLUSSES:
5/60 and 3/36 warranties comparable with Honda's main competitors.
2.9% incentive financing, on a brand-new design, very unusual for Honda.
Both FWD and AWD versions available.
Turbine-smooth, tomb-quiet V6 idle comparable to Lexus LS460 V8. (It is SO smooth/quiet that I almost tried to crank it
while running).
Smooth transmission shifts.
Good wind noise isolation.
Slightly jittery but still-comfortable ride.
Relatively flat cornering, even with a higher-raised suspension than a conventional Accord.
3-cylinder de-acivation at cruise (its effect on fuel economy, though, is unclear)
Well-done, responsive brakes, with no pedal-sponginess, a marked improvement over some other Honda brakes.
Reasonably well-located brake/gas pedals.
Generally good undergood layout/access.
Underhood cross-brace for front-chassis rigidity.
Slick, smooth, even paint job, though the black vehicles show a little orange-peel.
Large but handsome (IMO) chrome grille.
Super-slick-feel, easy-folding, snap-lock side mirrors (Honda, IMO, does this better than any other automaker).
Good exterior hardware/trim (not quite as solid as some former Hondas).
Laser-precise, solid-closing doors.
Good body sheet metal.
Classy, brushed-metallic rear-bumper/cargo-lip protective plates.
Nice interior wood trim.
Excellent interior hardware.
Well-done mix of soft/hard interior dash/door-panel materials.
OK-to-good front headroom with sunroof housing.
Good rear legroom.
Well-finished/well-trimmed cargo area.
Superb cargo-area materials.
Reversible carpet/hard-surface cargo-floor panel.
Convienient, lever-pull, remote rear-seat release in cargo area.
Comfortable, supportive cloth and leather front seats...but the leather seats are slippery.
Clear, simple, readable primary/secondary gauges.
Complex but well-marked center-dash buttons/controls.
Fore/aft transmission shifter has no annoying zig-zag motion.
Great, but not quite killer, stereo sound-quality.
Both standard and leather-covered steering wheels well-designed and comfortable to hold.
MINUSES:
Highly controversial rear roofline and rear-end styling, IMO, looks frumpy.
(much like on BMW's new 550GT).
Droop-down rear roofline impedes on cargo-area room.
VERY poor rear vision.
Offered in high-line EX and EX-L trim only....no LX models like other Accords.
No 4-cylinder, CVT, or manual-transmission models offered, like with the Subaru Outback.
Moderately peaky torque curve on the V6.
AWD system, with transverse engine, is heavier/more complex than on Subarus.
AWD weight/drag impedes on V6 performance, especially at low RPM's.
No D4 downshifts, only D3 and below.
No automanual shift-paddles or shift-gate.
Somewhat on the pricey side.
OK but rather mediocre steering response.
Slight but audible road noise, as in many Honda products.
Exhaust noise becomes noticeable on acceleration.
No body-side mouldings for parking-lot protection.
18" wheels on EX-L version are, IMO, larger than necessary (the 17"wheels on the EX are ideal on this vehicle).
(yes,I know opinions will differ on this subject, but that is mine)
Covered wiper-arms make the wiper-blades somewhat awkward to get to.
Spare tire hidden under rear-bumper (in a cover) like on pickup trucks.
Dated, conventional, side-column ignition switch/key (a start/stop push-button would be more fitting for this price class)
No cloth seat choice with AWD.
Very slippery leather seats.
Marginal rear headroom for tall people.
And, as always............Happy Car Shopping.
MM
http://automobiles.honda.com/accord-crosstour/
In a Nutshell: Honda-Accord quality inside and out, a good Subaru competitor, but with several marketing/design goofs.
I did not receive any specific CL or non-CL requests for a Crosstour review, but, for a number of reasons, decided to review and test-drive it anyway. I know that many of you in CL have sharp opinions about it, both pro and con....this was brought out in some earlier Crosstour discussion threads. I'm coming up on my usual 5-year replacement cycle on a new car, and, while another Subaru is a strong possibility, I don't want to ignore the competition either. As with the competing Toyota Venza (which, as of this writing, is, of course, caught up in Toyota's throttle/floor-mat problems and the endless media blitz), the Crosstour is Honda's first real Subaru AWD passenger-car competition in many years. Honda, sadly, has not sold an AWD passenger-car in the American market since the tall Civic AWD wagon of the 1980's, relying first on rebadged Isuzu SUVs and, later, the Honda-designed CR-V and Pilot SUVs. Toyota, of course, had the AWD Matrix (and the rebadged Pontiac Vibe AWD, the same car), but it did not sell in the numbers that the regular FWD models did. Toyota, like Honda, until recently, relied mostly on SUVs for their AWD vehicles.
The ubiquitous Honda Accord line, of course, was introduced to America in 1976, and has been here ever since. With the possible exception of the Toyota Camry (introduced in 1983-84), perhaps no other sedan has so completely captured the minds and hearts of the American public as the Accord. Its incredible sales success, and its iron-clad establishment in the American market, speaks for itself. It has been on the 10 Best List of Car and Driver magazine for over 20 years, and on Consumer Reports' Recommended or Top Pick List even longer than that. It has see-sawed with, or just trailed, the Toyota Camry for Best-Selling car status, again, for over 20 years (in the early 1990's, the Ford Taurus was also a big player). So, since its history in America is so well-established and documented, I won't go into all the details here, except to say that the popularity of the Accord sedan was (and is) so huge that even the coupe and wagon models couldn't really compete, and the wagons were dropped in the mid-90s.
I never liked the fact, though, that the Accord wagons were dropped, and that an AWD version was never offered here in the American market that would compete with Subarus. Until now, that is. Following on the heels of the introduction of Toyota's FWD/AWD Venza wagon last year, we FINALLY, after all these years, have an AWD, lift-back Accord with a raised-suspension that can compete, at least on paper, with the Subaru Outbacks, which have pretty much dominated this market. So, as with the Venza, even without any formal review requests, I had to check this car out.
I saw it at the D.C. Auto Show, of course, in late January, and, as with most Honda products, I was impressed with the materials and assembly-quality inside and out....it shows the usual Honda dedication to quality materials and laser-like assembly precision. The rear end, though, is poorly-done, with an awkward appearance, with VERY poor rear-vision from a rear window-cross-bar, small rear-quarter peep-windows, and impeding rear headrests. It also forces the spare tire outside, underneath the rear of the car, inside a cover. The rear-end has gotten a lot of negative comments in CL chat, and, while styling, of course, is a subjective matter, some of those criticisms, IMO, from a practical point, are valid. Others, IMO, are not.
For 2010, three versions of the Crosstour are offered in the American market, FWD/AWD EX models and an AWD EX-L. No cheaper DX or LX models are offered, as with some other Hondas......a marketing goof, IMO. That, of course, forces the pricing of all versions pretty much at or above 30K (FWD EX models start at $29,670). You won't find any mid-high 20's models like with the Outback. Nor will you find any four-cylinder, manual-transmission, or CVT versions either, like with the Outback...though that may not be a bad thing, since the Crosstour's size and AWD weight/drag blunts even the V6's performance....I'm not sure a four-banger could handle this load. The standard (and only) Crosstour engine is the ubiquitous 3.5L Honda/Acura v6 with 3-cylinder cruise-decativation, with 281 HP and 254 ft-lbs. of torque in Crosstour application. The only transmission offered is a smooth-shifting 5-speed automatic that lacks both a D4 downshift and a separate sport/manual-shift gate...the downshifts are D3, 2, and 1. Though the literature/specs on this are unclear, this seems to be a strictly AWD-on-Demand system, and apparantly is not the same type of AWD as the SH-AWD found on Honda's sister Acura products.
Inside, cloth or leather is offered on the FWD, but only leather on the AWD models.....another marketing goof, IMO, as the cloth seats are both comfortable/supportive and hold you in MUCH better than the slippery, slide-prone leather seats. The leather is mandatory on AWD models. 17" wheels come on the EX.......18" on the EX-L, which, IMO, seemed larger than necessary and were almost as large as the gross 19 and 20" wheels on the Toyota Venza.
Unlike most of my reviews, my interest in this car was personal as well as simply done for review purposes. I had a lot of interest in this car for a reason, looking upon it as a possible (if not very likely) next-purchase for myself. It is the best Subaru competitor (nothwithstanding the poorly-done rear end) that Honda has come up with in many years, and equals or beats Subaru in some aspects of build/material quality. But I also want to take a good look at the upcoming Acura TSX Sportwagon, as it promises equal build quality with a far more sensible, more-conventional rear end.
I static-examined a couple of different versions of the Crosstour, but, for the test-drive, I chose the model I would be most interested in....an AWD EX-L with a nice light-green/gray Opal Sage paint job and Ivory interior. I preferred the cloth, of course, but the leather is standard with AWD. Since I was doing this review pretty much for myself, and did not get any formal requests for it, I'll just list the PLUSSES and MINUSES I found, and skip the usual long, narrative review I do for each section. If any of you have a specific questions about anything on the vehicle in particular (other than what I've already mentioned), just ask......I'll answer them in specific detail.
Model Reviewed: 2010 Honda Crosstour EX-L 4WD (AWD)
Base Price: $34,020
Options: None
Destination/Freight: $710
List Price as Reviewed: $34,730
Drivetrain: On-demand AWD, Transverse-mounted 3.5L SOHC I-VTEC V6, 271 HP @ 6200 RPM, Torque 254 Ft-lbs. @ 5000 RPM, 5-speed automatic.
EPA Mileage Rating: 17 City, 25 Highway (AWD) / 18 City. 27 Highway (FWD)
Exterior Color: Opal Sage
Interior: Ivory Leather.
PLUSSES:
5/60 and 3/36 warranties comparable with Honda's main competitors.
2.9% incentive financing, on a brand-new design, very unusual for Honda.
Both FWD and AWD versions available.
Turbine-smooth, tomb-quiet V6 idle comparable to Lexus LS460 V8. (It is SO smooth/quiet that I almost tried to crank it
while running).
Smooth transmission shifts.
Good wind noise isolation.
Slightly jittery but still-comfortable ride.
Relatively flat cornering, even with a higher-raised suspension than a conventional Accord.
3-cylinder de-acivation at cruise (its effect on fuel economy, though, is unclear)
Well-done, responsive brakes, with no pedal-sponginess, a marked improvement over some other Honda brakes.
Reasonably well-located brake/gas pedals.
Generally good undergood layout/access.
Underhood cross-brace for front-chassis rigidity.
Slick, smooth, even paint job, though the black vehicles show a little orange-peel.
Large but handsome (IMO) chrome grille.
Super-slick-feel, easy-folding, snap-lock side mirrors (Honda, IMO, does this better than any other automaker).
Good exterior hardware/trim (not quite as solid as some former Hondas).
Laser-precise, solid-closing doors.
Good body sheet metal.
Classy, brushed-metallic rear-bumper/cargo-lip protective plates.
Nice interior wood trim.
Excellent interior hardware.
Well-done mix of soft/hard interior dash/door-panel materials.
OK-to-good front headroom with sunroof housing.
Good rear legroom.
Well-finished/well-trimmed cargo area.
Superb cargo-area materials.
Reversible carpet/hard-surface cargo-floor panel.
Convienient, lever-pull, remote rear-seat release in cargo area.
Comfortable, supportive cloth and leather front seats...but the leather seats are slippery.
Clear, simple, readable primary/secondary gauges.
Complex but well-marked center-dash buttons/controls.
Fore/aft transmission shifter has no annoying zig-zag motion.
Great, but not quite killer, stereo sound-quality.
Both standard and leather-covered steering wheels well-designed and comfortable to hold.
MINUSES:
Highly controversial rear roofline and rear-end styling, IMO, looks frumpy.
(much like on BMW's new 550GT).
Droop-down rear roofline impedes on cargo-area room.
VERY poor rear vision.
Offered in high-line EX and EX-L trim only....no LX models like other Accords.
No 4-cylinder, CVT, or manual-transmission models offered, like with the Subaru Outback.
Moderately peaky torque curve on the V6.
AWD system, with transverse engine, is heavier/more complex than on Subarus.
AWD weight/drag impedes on V6 performance, especially at low RPM's.
No D4 downshifts, only D3 and below.
No automanual shift-paddles or shift-gate.
Somewhat on the pricey side.
OK but rather mediocre steering response.
Slight but audible road noise, as in many Honda products.
Exhaust noise becomes noticeable on acceleration.
No body-side mouldings for parking-lot protection.
18" wheels on EX-L version are, IMO, larger than necessary (the 17"wheels on the EX are ideal on this vehicle).
(yes,I know opinions will differ on this subject, but that is mine)
Covered wiper-arms make the wiper-blades somewhat awkward to get to.
Spare tire hidden under rear-bumper (in a cover) like on pickup trucks.
Dated, conventional, side-column ignition switch/key (a start/stop push-button would be more fitting for this price class)
No cloth seat choice with AWD.
Very slippery leather seats.
Marginal rear headroom for tall people.
And, as always............Happy Car Shopping.
MM
Last edited by mmarshall; 03-11-10 at 02:05 PM.
03-11-10, 02:27 PM
#4
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Honda tends to market their vehicles like that. They don't offer a lot of stand-alone options, preferring, instead, to put the options in the trim-level instead. So, for example, to get the option (or package) you want, you often have to buy a DX, or LX, or EX, version where that equipment is included. It lessens the buyers' choice, of course, but makes it easler for the manufacturer to program the assembly-lines.
Yes...and the Pilot has the same AWD system as well. But the Pilot, of course, is a tall SUV, and tends to drive like one. Not so with the much more car-like Crosstour....it drives like an Outback or Venza.
The Pilot DOES, however, have a properly-shaped cargo area and decent rear vision.....which is more than I can say for the Crosstour.
Doesn't the Pilot have the same AWD V6 with all the functionality?
The Pilot DOES, however, have a properly-shaped cargo area and decent rear vision.....which is more than I can say for the Crosstour.
03-11-10, 02:32 PM
#5
Lexus Fanatic
Sure looks like the ugliest 2010 Honda, IMO. I've seen way more of these on the showroom floor at car shows and dealerships than I've seen on the road.
Condensed is an improvement btw (thumbs-up).
Condensed is an improvement btw (thumbs-up).
03-11-10, 02:33 PM
#6
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
That's because of no lower-level DX/LX, manual-transmission, or smaller-engined versions. Also, of course, because it's a Honda.....people are often willing to pay a premium for Hondas, though, surprisingly, Honda does offer 2.9% financing on it.
It's roomy inside until you get to rear-seat headroom and cargo area....things go downhll from there.
.. looks spacious inside
It's roomy inside until you get to rear-seat headroom and cargo area....things go downhll from there.
03-11-10, 02:43 PM
#7
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
You think it's worse-looking than the Fit? 
I'm not sure I agree. The Fit, IMO, looks like an egg with insect-eyes.
You probably won't see them on the road in significant numbers for a while yet. It's a brand-new model, just getting into stock at dealerships. The Honda shop I was at today, for example, had only three of them.
Thanks....but I guess that's subjective. Some people like the long narratives I write up, but, in this case, without a specific review request, I wasn't going to spend a lot of time on that. I spent long enough on this one as it is.
I'm not sure I agree. The Fit, IMO, looks like an egg with insect-eyes.
I've seen way more of these on the showroom floor at car shows and dealerships than I've seen on the road.
Condensed is an improvement btw (thumbs-up).
Trending Topics
03-11-10, 02:52 PM
#8
Lexus Fanatic
03-11-10, 03:03 PM
#9
i think if the crosstour is lucky it could threaten the pontiac asstek for the most heinous vehicle in us history...
looks like a giant platypus on wheels...
oh, and i actually like the buggy fit =)
looks like a giant platypus on wheels...
oh, and i actually like the buggy fit =)
03-11-10, 03:14 PM
#11
mmarshall,
Thanks for your insight
This is a car high on my list for replacing my wife's 04 Pilot in a couple of years. Overall I think they did a fine job with it, but there are 3 things that stand in the way for me with this vehicle.
1) The rearward visibility. Like you mentioned it was the first thing my wife said when she sat in it. I'm not sure I'll ever get her past that. we'll see.
2) Price, I do find it a little high, but the real issue is for about the same dollars (looks aside) she could get into another 8 passenger Pilot.
3) I (we) both really like the new RX. I'm seriously considering opening up my wallet and getting a 2010 off a 2 year lease in a couple of years.
Otherwise, I think its a good vehicle. One question, I believe you did take one for a ride, as we use her vehicle for long drives (read family vacations) how did you find the highway ride? Smooth? Quiet? passing ability?
As always Thanks for these reviews!
Thanks for your insight
This is a car high on my list for replacing my wife's 04 Pilot in a couple of years. Overall I think they did a fine job with it, but there are 3 things that stand in the way for me with this vehicle.
1) The rearward visibility. Like you mentioned it was the first thing my wife said when she sat in it. I'm not sure I'll ever get her past that. we'll see.
2) Price, I do find it a little high, but the real issue is for about the same dollars (looks aside) she could get into another 8 passenger Pilot.
3) I (we) both really like the new RX. I'm seriously considering opening up my wallet and getting a 2010 off a 2 year lease in a couple of years.
Otherwise, I think its a good vehicle. One question, I believe you did take one for a ride, as we use her vehicle for long drives (read family vacations) how did you find the highway ride? Smooth? Quiet? passing ability?
As always Thanks for these reviews!
03-11-10, 03:50 PM
#13
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
...but, even then, it had its supporters. I once saw a young couple, at a Pontiac dealership walk in, fall in love with a white Aztek, test-drive it, and take it home that very afternoon.
