[schwartzy1]

Looks like Honda is still a couple steps behind:
CR-V Details--
-2.4 Liter engine - 170hp
-No more spare wheel attached to the rear door
-just a bit shorter, about 3 inches.
-But lower (quite a bit) and wider.

 

[Inocense]

:shock: Is that what it really looks like????

That is not so pretty and I am very happy that I didn't hold out for one.. heh..

They are headed in the right direction with the lower and wider part though.. But shorter? Dunno bout that.. No grill? Ick.. Looks funny..

 

[Buzz]

Re: 06 RAV4 vs 07 CR-V

Looks like Honda is still a couple steps behind:
CR-V Details--
-2.4 Liter engine - 170hp
-No more spare wheel attached to the rear door
-just a bit shorter, about 3 inches.
-But lower (quite a bit) and wider.

Just moving the spare off the rear door would probably make it 3 inches shorter. With good design, the 2007 CR-V could actually be larger on the inside than the 2006.

I'm not sure that being a little smaller than the RAV4 is much of a competitive disadvantage. Anybody who is considering the 4cyl, 5 seat RAV4 could still consider the CR-V.

 

[puttputt]

Maybe it's because I haven't had my coffee yet but it looks like a mix of the Vue, Rav, and Matrix. Don't like the nose. It does look funny w/o a grill. At least it has more hp.

 

[spwolfx]

Re: 06 RAV4 vs 07 CR-V

Looks like Honda is still a couple steps behind:
CR-V Details--
-2.4 Liter engine - 170hp
-No more spare wheel attached to the rear door
-just a bit shorter, about 3 inches.
-But lower (quite a bit) and wider.

Just moving the spare off the rear door would probably make it 3 inches shorter. With good design, the 2007 CR-V could actually be larger on the inside than the 2006.

I'm not sure that being a little smaller than the RAV4 is much of a competitive disadvantage. Anybody who is considering the 4cyl, 5 seat RAV4 could still consider the CR-V.

most definetly they are competition... Dont forget that CRV outsold Rav4 up to 2006 - 2:1. Today, Rav4 outsells CRV.

Problem with moving tire below is that you lose a lot of boot space and you end up having raised boot floor - and boot space and very low boot floor are really big advantages of Rav4.

 

[schwartzy1]

maybe i said that wrong...the CR-V is 3 inches shorter in height than the old one, i am not sure about length

 

[Baron G]

Re: 06 RAV4 vs 07 CR-V

Problem with moving tire below is that you lose a lot of boot space and you end up having raised boot floor - and boot space and very low boot floor are really big advantages of RAV4.

You are, of course, correct, but I think many people buying these vehicles rarely make use of the full cargo area, and moving the spare under the floor does wonders for the aesthetics. I, for one, would have given up the under-floor storage in the trunk to move the spare wheel down there.

Just look at the top-spec Euro models with run-flats rather than a spare. It looks much better.

Does placing looks over utility make me a sad, shallow Southern Californian? :wink:

 

[rablat5]

That picture has been around for a while now, and it may not accurately reflect the actual design of the new CR-V. Honda has NOT officially released any photos of it yet, so don't anyone jump the gun on this.

 

[syadasti]

That picture has been around for a while now, and it may not accurately reflect the actual design of the new CR-V. Honda has NOT officially released any photos of it yet, so don't anyone jump the gun on this.

Its not a real picture, its a computer made/altered image.

This is an actual prototype photo:

Toyota aims to sell around 25% V6 engines in the US market...a fraction of all 4.3 sold worldwide which will be mostly 4 cylinder and some diesels, depending on the market. With most other makers now offering a V6, Honda can aim to deliver the best 4 cylinder option for the market especially good with users very sensitive to gas prices in this segment. They could change their tune about drivetrain or just be keep it secret for now too, you never know...

 

[HandleAnythingRAV]

I think that the RAV has a HUGE advantage over some of the others with HP (V6 anyway) and the storage in the back if you do not get the 3rd row. When we went looking for a new vehicle we wanted 3rd row but after seeing that our daughters stroller could fit in the back and we would still leave the house as if the RAV was empty that was a HUGE seller- not to mention the gas milage this has over some of the others we looked at. We ahve only had our RAV since Saturday but so far I am EXTREMELY happy with our purchase.

 

[rablat5]

^^ Now that looks more like it. The vehicle in front is an Acura RDX, and the one in back is a CR-V. While it looks nice so far, it looks more on the plain side and more urban than the RAV4 does, which looks more rugged/muscular.

 

[Raffor]

Looking at the photo I don't see them adding a 3rd row. But let's see what happens in fall.

I do not justify my buy since i like what I have and it fits my family and my bill. There will always be something better out there now or in the future. The question is if something else is doing a better job too?

...still like the clean look of the new CR-V. But then I hated the current CR-V interior. Cannot see that being changed too dramatically.

 

[spwolfx]

I think that the RAV has a HUGE advantage over some of the others with HP (V6 anyway) and the storage in the back if you do not get the 3rd row. When we went looking for a new vehicle we wanted 3rd row but after seeing that our daughters stroller could fit in the back and we would still leave the house as if the RAV was empty that was a HUGE seller- not to mention the gas milage this has over some of the others we looked at. We ahve only had our RAV since Saturday but so far I am EXTREMELY happy with our purchase.

exactly... Of course, it might not matter for someone, but for me it would be an reason not to buy 4.2 because I simply couldnt go anywhere with my wife and my baby. They also made 4.2 cargo area much wider by redesigning suspension so my baby stroller can fit nicely in there, unlike before.

Currently Toyota sells around 4,500 V6 Rav4's per month, I definetly dont see that as small number .

Also, that predicted 170hp is only 4 hp more than Rav4's, and I doubt weight will be the same...

 

[Xenon-Shop.]

we can be sure!! the rav4 06 is the best suv on the market on this area, i mean, escape, crv, vitara, etc, great design(i give to toyota a 100 for that). Also the interior is amazing.

 

[summerwind]

As a 2002 CRV owner and now a 2006 RAV4 owner I have the following observations..

CRV...pluses
has a 5 speed automatic for the 4 liter iVTEC
develops max torgue at 3600 rpm vs RAV max torque at 4000 rpm (not a biggy but off the line the CRV felt more agressive)

2007 will have a lift gate and no tire (personal preference here. short people probably prefer a door on the rear instead of a lift gate)

The 2007 is rumored to have a Navigation system option

no bizzare shift gate (currently it is on the dash and is a straight line)

Can be towed 4 down behind an RV ( not a biggy if you don't have an RV)

CRV ---minuses
Changing oil is frustrating. The location of the filter is on top of the rack an pinion assembly and is horizontal. Oil drips all over when you change it

Noise. Various clicks and clunks from front end

RT4WD has a "come to Jesus" moment when you turn left and accelerate hard. Acts like severe torque steer but seems to be a combination of unequal axle lengths in the front and the RT4WD system activating

Bridgestone Dualer tires are noisy

RAV4..pluses

Seems to be more refined. Will see what Honda has coming up in the 2007 CRV

Noise reduction. Toyota has done a good job with sound deadening in the new RAV

Engine layout... 5 stars for how the oil filter was designed to be vertical and easy to access

Has side curtain air bags but it is a bummer that it is an option and not standard.

RAV4.. minuses

Bizaar shift gate.

Is the only one that still has a rear door with a tire attached (again this is a personal preference thing)

Some might feel that the lack of a V6 in the CRV is a minus. Again this is personal preference here but if I was to opt for the 3.5 liter V6 I would get it in the new Highlander that is rumored to be coming out the end of the year.


Any other prior CRV owners here that care to comment??

My decision to opt for the RAV4 was primary timing.

I wanted to trade in my 02 and waiting until the end of the year for the new CRV would have reduced my trade in value and my license tabs were due in August..Lame reason but was one of the factors that lead to the switch.

Looked at the Matrix and the Mazda3 wagon but they were not a good fit. Subaru (had two Outbacks in the past) is a way behind the redesign curve and they seem to go with a turbo 4 that requires 91 octane at a time when gas prices are going through the roof (by US standards).

 

[Janos]

I had a 2001 CRV and I had 2 complaints with the vehicle. It bigtime lacked power except for city puddle jumping and road noise was unbelievable on the highway.

With that being said, the thing did the job and gave no trouble. Would buy it again under the same circumstances as when I bought it.

As compared to the new RAV4........ it's not worth discussing. Have to wait for the 2007 CRV to think about it.

 

[spwolfx]

exactly... and what was #1 complaint about Rav4 4.2? Power!

 

[kc456]

This is an actual prototype photo:

Looks better than the 2006 CR-V but still kind of "dour."

 

[KarlZuni]

Another possible plus of the CRV - Honda might actually make enough to have some on the lots. :wink:
But seriously, at the rate Toyota is making V6 limited, I will certainly look at the Mazda CX-7, probably the Acura RDX and maybe even the CRV.

 

[Janos]

All good choices to look at. If there is one piece of advice I could give it would be to try to make it to an auto show before purchase. It's the easiest way to see all the cars in one place without pressure or a nag. It helped me narrow the list down quite a lot after looking at fit and finish and comfort.