[vb-saan]

Originally Posted by Yeldo

IMHO, the CRV is not intended at the Fortuner/ Pajero Sport crowd, and why its sales figures were down to single digit numbers for the past year had to do more with insane pricing rather than the absence of a Diesel mill. The CRV is one of the most comfortable cars in its segment, including sedans, as it is low enough to have a less jerky ride, and still have the crucial advantage in ground clearance and seating position. The BMW X1 is of course an interesting option, but if you want a hassle free, reliable and comfortable car with good resale value, the CRV outshines the Captiva or the Koleos by a whole yard. Now that Honda have corrected (somewhat) the prices, I hope it shall fare better. BTW, I'm also considering a CRV now, has to see whether Nissan upgrade the X Trail in 1- 2 months time, or if Skoda bring in a L&K A/T version of the Yeti.

I agree. The CRV is known for its sedan-like manners, and it’s indeed a good looking car in its new avatar. Even with petrol-only option, I expect this car to do reasonably well. Yes, the Yeti is a great option, but unlike the Skoda the CRV is more neutral in appearance (and hence less polarized opinions), and Honda as a brand is still on the better side when it comes to customer experience.

[antz.bin]

I don't understand all the fuss about the FE. Doesn't the Accord / Camry (Even Fluence CVT for that matter) return very similar city FE no.s to the ones being mentioned about the CRV ? How much better would a 2.4l Accord do in similar driving conditions? Highways almost always offer an order of magnitude better FE than what you get in B2B traffic in the city. I see no reason why both 2.0l CRVs (MT/AT) shouldn't manage double digit Highway FE and still be more spacious than any of the D2 Sedans.

49 Camrys, 73 Accords, 20 Sonatas & 54 Petrol Superbs were sold just last month. Apart from these, there are some *single digit* no.s from the more expensive non German 5 seater Soft roaders too.

Whatever you guys may feel, I think this CRV is good enough to manage 50-60 units consistently month after month. Those no.s are par for most of the current D2 segment cars. And the scene for Petrol cars is only going to improve as the months go on.

While I do concede that its sacrilege on the part of Honda not to offer Direct Injection in a new generation car like this, there is still a lot going for this car which would give it much better sales than what the last gen managed. I can even see some people who have posted in this very thread considering it in their shopping list for the very first time.

The Fortuner will always have the advantage of being able to seat 2 more people and offers proper 4x4. The CRV's no.s would never be anywhere close to what the Fortuner manages.

But I doubt that would have happened even if the CRV 2.2 Diesel would have been offered because its not like any of the Diesel D2 Soft-roaders are setting the sales charts on fire. There were just 16 Captivas, 55 Santa Fe's, 0 X-Trails & 37 Koleos sold last month. Even if the Honda manages 40-50, they already have the segment winner!

[swiftnfurious]

While I see there are lot of arguments in favour of CR-V stating it's a good price & right in the same segment as Superb; doesn't Superb have a much better level of kit? Also wouldn't the quality of materials better in a Superb? I am just trying to understand these parts.

I personally feel, a Superb will have a better sense of "arriving" than a CRV. I am sure that matters to a lot of people who spend that kinda cash. But for highway drives, guess CRV will be a better deal since it has a higher seating position + ride quality of a low slung sedan. Another advantage I see with CRV is reliability & cheaper A$$ & spare costs compared to a Superb.

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by swiftnfurious

I personally feel, a Superb will have a better sense of "arriving" than a CRV. I am sure that matters to a lot of people who spend that kinda cash. But for highway drives, guess CRV will be a better deal since it has a higher seating position + ride quality of a low slung sedan. Another advantage I see with CRV is reliability & cheaper A$$ & spare costs compared to a Superb.

Don't forget the problematic DSG box in the Superb. People buy Camry's and Accords only because they are afraid of the Skoda reliability, high maintenance costs. Else the Superb is a fantastic product. Take our moderator Navin who got a Camry with lesser trim at a higher price only because of reliability and after sales.

[316kmph]

Why does the CRV loose the super comfortable foldable arm rest for some glovebox, doesn't the car already have too many???

As already pointed out 1.4 lakh is a joke for the fidgety touch screen running some Garmin software. Guess a full lakh too many, could have upgraded the sound system, 10 way power seats (instead of 8), auto headlights, iPhone compatibility (not sure if already available), multiple bluetooth pairing (ability to receive calls without having to switch default phone - not sure if its already there), powered tailgate and text messaging capability (not sure if already available) as well for that money.

[asr245]

Originally Posted by swiftnfurious

While I see there are lot of arguments in favour of CR-V stating it's a good price & right in the same segment as Superb; doesn't Superb have a much better level of kit? Also wouldn't the quality of materials better in a Superb? I am just trying to understand these parts.

I personally feel, a Superb will have a better sense of "arriving" than a CRV. I am sure that matters to a lot of people who spend that kinda cash. But for highway drives, guess CRV will be a better deal since it has a higher seating position + ride quality of a low slung sedan. Another advantage I see with CRV is reliability & cheaper A$$ & spare costs compared to a Superb.

With Honda, you get peace of mind. With a Skoda/VW/German car, you probably need to keep the number of a towing chap handy. For me, no amount of trim/driving pleasure can equate to peace of mind. Never mind that inspite of that Honda's A.S.S. is way better than any European brand.

Originally Posted by Vid6639

Don't forget the problematic DSG box in the Superb. People buy Camry's and Accords only because they are afraid of the Skoda reliability, high maintenance costs. Else the Superb is a fantastic product. Take our moderator Navin who got a Camry with lesser trim at a higher price only because of reliability and after sales.

If I had the money, I too would fall in this category.

[abs182]

Originally Posted by Vid6639

While others may not like the looks of the CR-V so much, I kind of like it.
============
The CR-V is a more practical option to Camry, Accord, Superb, Passat and Jetta.

I so can relate to your argument as like you I too am planning to replace my 2005 Corolla and I too was gunning for the fortuner but with now the CRV sanely priced I am waiting for my neighborhood to get a demo version soon for my test drive. If the fuel economy is around 10ish around the city it'll seal the deal for me plus a thorough TD though.

For people like us the CRV we suits reasonably well because we are neither looking for a car that will out last us eg. Tfort nor are we looking to jump the 30+ lacs price bracket. So I for one am definitely looking forward to try the CRV for sure.

[ackyash]

Originally Posted by swiftnfurious

While I see there are lot of arguments in favour of CR-V stating it's a good price & right in the same segment as Superb; doesn't Superb have a much better level of kit? Also wouldn't the quality of materials better in a Superb? I am just trying to understand these parts.

I personally feel, a Superb will have a better sense of "arriving" than a CRV. I am sure that matters to a lot of people who spend that kinda cash. But for highway drives, guess CRV will be a better deal since it has a higher seating position + ride quality of a low slung sedan. Another advantage I see with CRV is reliability & cheaper A$$ & spare costs compared to a Superb.

I have a Skoda Laura L&K 2007 in which the Turbo blew 4 times in 6 years.Each time the car was in the workship for a period ranging from 3 weeks to 5 weeks. Changed twice under warranty and twice out of my own pocket.

My cousin's Superb 2011 had its turbo blow out in the 1st year of ownership. Changed under warranty - time taken 30+days.
Skoda's are solid cars but reliabilty and after sales issues are a major headache. Honda's may be petrol but chances of going belly-up on the highways are very low, unlike its diesel European counterparts.

[agambhandari]

Originally Posted by swiftnfurious

I personally feel, a Superb will have a better sense of "arriving" than a CRV. I am sure that matters to a lot of people who spend that kinda cash.

I don't think so. In India it is the SUV that gets the automatic salaam from everybody.

If you want that from a sedan it better smell expensive and have a 3 pointed star on the hood!

[zenren]

19.95L for the MT version seems really mouth watering. They have definitely learned how to price a product.

1.45 lakhs plus taxes for the AVN unit. In Bangalore, you would be ending up paying close to 1.7 lakhs for that AVN unit, considering the 18% road tax too on the additional showroom price. I hope Honda puts some serious stuff there.

Variant wise pricing and feature spec from ACI site:

2.0 MT: Rs 19.95 lakh
2.0 AT: Rs 20.85 lakh
2.4 AT: Rs 22.40 lakh
2.4 AT AVN: Rs 23.85 lakh

All CR-V variants come with a standard reverse camera, steering-mounted audio controls, cruise control, one touch folding rear seats, and a button-activated Econ-mode for a more fuel efficient drive.

2.0L MT comes with a six-speed manual gearbox, 17-inch alloy wheels, fog lamps, six airbags, a multi-info display, dual zone A/C and an integrated audio system with CD/MP3/USB and iPod connectivity.

2.0L AT comes with all the features but also gets a five-speed automatic gearbox with hill start assist and a foot-type parking brake.

2.4L AT gets a more powerful 2.4-litre petrol motor that’s good for 185bhp. It comes with 4WD, sunroof, HID lamps with washer, a five-speed automatic transmission with paddle shifters and outer door handles with chrome trim.

2.4L AT (AVN) comes with all the features of the 2.4AT and also gets a 6.1-inch touch screen with Navigation, DVD/CD player with IPod, USB, Bluetooth and hands-free telephone connectivity.

Source: http://www.autocarindia.com/News/329...-new-cr-v.aspx

[anandpadhye]

Originally Posted by Vid6639

Take our moderator Navin who got a Camry with lesser trim at a higher price only because of reliability and after sales.

Isn't it like going for diploma after 10'th because you are seeing others not doing well enough in 12'th to get into degree?

BTW, maintaining diesels and turbocharged engines needs some care and knowledge on part of the owner. For those who don't want to get into it, there are Honda's and Toyota's (in leighter vein)...

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by anandpadhye

Isn't it like going for diploma after 10'th because you are seeing others not doing well enough in 12'th to get into degree?

BTW, maintaining diesels and turbocharged engines needs some care and knowledge on part of the owner. For those who don't want to get into it, there are Honda's and Toyota's (in leighter vein)...

It's not just the engines. You get electronic issues, air conditioning issues and such other stuff which one needs to know of to be able to tackle them effectively with the ASS.

Yes I agree that it needs care and knowledge to maintain these type of engines but you are forgetting one more important thing it requires, which is "time". That is something which noone will be willing to compromise on. Multiple visits to service centre, follow up calls and downtime for parts replacement is not something which many are willing to accept especially when shelling out 30 big ones.

[2500cc]

Did someone notice 170mm GC for an SUV or even for the soft-roader standards, to me it sounds like a joke

[agambhandari]

Originally Posted by 2500cc

Did someone notice 170mm GC for an SUV or even for the soft-roader standards, to me it sounds like a joke

Audi Q3 also has 170mm ground clearance. But, yes the CR-V has less ground clearance than most SUV's.

But I have always found the on-paper ground clearance to be pretty false.
For eg; Would you agree if I told you that a Lancer has more ground clearance than a Chevrolet Tavera?

[Santoshbhat]

Nice SUV at a nice price. The new design works! The softroader CRV looks like a perfect package for people from the urban landscape. Its not too big, not too bulky, very refined and car like to drive. You can use it for daily runs to the office and your family will love you when you take them out for the weekend in it. The trusted Honda badge is another very good thing going for it.

But the big deterrent is going to be the running costs. Its 2.0L and 2.4L petrol engines will struggle to give anything more than 8~ 9 kmpl even on the highway if you load it up. With the cost of petrol what it is today, I am sure it is going to give jitters to even the most affluent of buyers. Seems like Honda is banking on the Govt. to bring diesel prices closer to petrol. If that happens, with this pricing the CRV may not be a bad proposition actually.