[HKap]

It's crazy. Honda seems to mess up every product launch. The only cars and prices they seem to have gotten right are the City and Amaze. They've always had great products but they've either overpriced them, under powered them or both. The Jazz is a brilliant car but they got the pricing and the engine wrong. They later fixed the price but the engine is still messed up. Why can't they plonk the 1.5 from the city in the Jazz? It's unbelievable that they've tried so hard to fail. Same thing for the CRV. Why can't they bring the 1.5 turbo to India? It's a great engine that produces 190 bhp and powers the CRV, Civic and the Accord? If they're serious about India then they need to start manufacturing and powering or importing and powering these ridiculously priced cars with engines they deserve. How much would it cost them to have a hybrid engine in most or all of their cars? India I keep saying, is the perfect market for hybrids. Instead of investing crores in diesel engines, you're better off investing in hybrid engines. Imagine if you can get a Hybrid Honda in every segment for the same price as a diesel Honda? It would cost less to run and maintain. I'm sure Honda can use the manufacturing facility in India to export these engines to the rest of APAC or LATAM.

It's unfathomable that the recipe for success exists right in front of their eyes but they choose to fail EVERY TIME. I include Toyota in this bracket too. If they think they're going to beat Maruti and Hyundai at the petrol and diesel game then they're smoking the same stuff as one of our political geniuses who's supporting setting up a mobile factory in every city of India.

[gopi_rm]

Come on! Why on earth one would 40 Lacs for 120 bhp monocoque SUV from brand Honda?
The price is not acceptable even for an Acura SUV with same engine.
Honda is a mass market brand and at least they should have offered 2.0L engine with 160+ bhp to justify the price.

[Porcupine]

The CR-V has been overpriced for a while now so it's not really that shocking. They are still trying to play off the 'premium-but-reliable-SUV' tag of the CR-V from when it was launched back in the day.

[anish5225]

Does honda sell the CRV with the 1.6L diesel engine anywhere else in the world? Or is it an "Only for India" affair?

[Hells Bells]

Honda just goes on to reinforce their internal projection of Indian consumers - we are suckers. The fact that Honda will actually sell a couple of these will do no good to alter that opinion. Launches like these starting making Kodiaq and Tiguan look good.

[CrAzY dRiVeR]

Originally Posted by anish5225

Does honda sell the CRV with the 1.6L diesel engine anywhere else in the world? Or is it an "Only for India" affair?

No. Internationally it's the 1.6 iDTec itself, but with a difference. Most markets get a twin turbo 1.6 diesel producing 160hp, whereas markets like Philippines and India get the single turbo 120 hp version.

Even the twin turbo version is actually manufactured in India for exports to all those markets.

[StarrySky]

I agree that the CRV is over-priced, but then which of its competitor isn't? CRV was not a mass-market car even earlier, so this pricing doesn't come as a surprise. It's not going to set the sales chart on fire, but I think it will still find around 150-200 buyers every month, like Tiguan and Kodiaq.

Originally Posted by CrAzY dRiVeR

No. Internationally it's the 1.6 iDTec itself, but with a difference. Most markets get a twin turbo 1.6 diesel producing 160hp, whereas markets like Philippines and India get the single turbo 120 hp version.

Both versions are available here in Finland. But, as you can imagine, the 120HP version is available only with MT and 2WD and in lower trim levels.

Originally Posted by Axe77

I actually agree with Sahil. I think Dead on Arrival is a strong statement.

Lets break down the buyers of SUVs.

A. Endy / Fortuner.
B. Monocoque SUV buyers.

I guess there is another classification - petrol v/s diesel buyers. Those who prefer diesel would probably find Tiguan/Kodiaq better. I think the petrol CRV has a better chance and I wouldn't be surprised if most CRVs sold are petrol.

[Lone Ranger]

Originally Posted by CrAzY dRiVeR

With all due respect, you are contradicting yourself here.

Actually I think he was highlighting both sides of the pricing argument . I also think there could definitely be some people who would look at the CRV with interest.

For example, people who follow our auto market closely might have developed some apprehension towards the Skoda and the Jeep brand. Such a person might actually like the product but be wary of the company (service related, dealer ethics etc). In fact I am sure quite a few Bhpians will fall in this category.

Also, for within the city usage, if you aren't using the space that the full size SUVs offer, I think most of their advantages aren't really used. Plus you have to deal with that mammoth size every time you have to park.

[Axe77]

Originally Posted by Sahil

The pricing is either unjustified or justified from the way you look at it.

However, my hunch is that the core CRV target audience is different from the Fortuner/Endeavour. It is a niche, luxury product hence most would not be making the comparison on just size. There 3 broad category of CRV TG:
1.Several consumers would be existing CRV users who would be happy to upgrade at this price
2.Sedan owners upgrading to an SUV without being intimidated by the size of a full blown ones
3.Existing full size diesel SUV owners who are fed up of their Fortuners/Endeavour

Originally Posted by GTO

Almost an irrelevant a launch as the Accord Hybrid. At least the Accord was a lazy effort CBU. Why did Honda even bother with localisation for the CR-V, or assembling it here? Better to have just imported some as CBUs.

I'd any day buy the Tucson or Kodiaq if I wanted a monocoque crossover. Body-on-frame = Endeavour.

This is yet another dead-on-arrival product.

I actually agree with Sahil. I think Dead on Arrival is a strong statement.

Lets break down the buyers of SUVs.

A. Endy / Fortuner.
B. Monocoque SUV buyers.

1. To my mind, the target audience for A. and B. are completely different. Neither price nor BHP is not going to be the basis on which someone picks one over the other.

2. What are my choices amongst monocoque SUVs:

2.1 Kodiaq: Seems to be the better built product for a little more money. BUT, it comes with the Skoda tag. There are many that will buy the Honda for the perceived Honda / Toyota peace of mind over Skoda.

2.2 Tiguan: Already a flop. Same VAG issue for some buyers plus it is feels a size smaller.

2.3 Tucson: Again not a hit product. Certainly the most VFM of the lot. But if you sit inside it feels distinctly built to a price and just does not feel special. The CR-V is no Kodiaq in its finish but still feels like a much richer car compared to the Tucson.

My only massive gripe with Honda is that they should really at this price have given the 160 bhp engine. But again to the extent they are looking at sales this may not be a deal breaker for most prospective customers. They are 80% chauffeur driven and to the extent they self drive the CR-V isn't a slouch. The torque curve feels peppy enough within the city as well (I took a short TD yesterday at Arya - first day first show).

The Accord to your point GTO was bound to be a dud - you have the equally capable Camry available (with a spare wheel) at a cheaper price - it was always a no brainer to the Toyota on that one. Between Toyota and Honda, my opinion is that the current day Toyota's are slightly better built.

There is no direct Toyota competitor however to the Honda CR-V though the way the Camry is to the Accord.

On price, other than Tucson, every other car is overpriced so Honda isn't the only one to suffer that. Should it have been a couple of lakhs cheaper ideally? Yes. Will its sales suffer significantly because it isn't - I don't think so.

[Guna]

Originally Posted by Axe77

Lets break down the buyers of SUVs.

A. Endy / Fortuner.
B. Monocoque SUV buyers.

While it is true that the buyer who is looking for a 'car-like' soft roader may not look in to a 'truck like' SUVs, there are many buyers, who are neither educated (knowledge of autos) not bothered about the body construction type. What they probably know is:

• Some SUVs are bit delicate, aren't suitable for too much rough use, typically not very spacious (for the third row and the luggage area)
• Some SUVs are robust, big, imposing, people pay attention

In one of the companies I had worked for, most of the top management had bought Fortuners. Not because they wanted a 'ladder frame' based SUVs, but because with the car allowance budget they had, this was the most imposing car they could buy (which also happened to be popular. Everyone buys, so it must be good). Things like whether it was a 4X4 or 2WD or the engine capacity did not matter to them.

[CrAzY dRiVeR]

Honda posts this video of the media reviewers praising the all new CR-V -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yF7lcHCq28g

[fordfreak]

I for one, kind of like the new CR-V.

For starters, I'm interested in the petrol variant. My usage is 100% in city traffic along with the occasional highway run. My monthly usage is also pretty low, only about 700 to 900 KMs. I need 5 seats and good boot space. I look for car's which are loaded with safety/convenience/feel-good features; i.e. - airbags, sunroof, good infotainment system, etc. Based on my needs, the CR-V does seem like a good option for me. Plus I've owned each generation of the City and am very satisfied with my experience with Honda products.

Yes, the engine and pricing could have been better. But given my usage pattern, I would rarely need all the power. As for the price, it is a tad high, but not as ridiculous as the diesel variant (considering the engine being offered).

I loved the Jeep Compass Limited Plus (price + package), but the small boot is a major deal breaker for me. The Tiguan and Tucson are good options too. But I'm staying away from VW due to my past experiences and the Tucson feels a little underwhelming IMHO. The Fortuner is the segment leader, but will be due for a facelift soon (I'm guessing).

I'll be looking for a new car around April, so I still have time to make a decision. Will be eagerly waiting for the official T-BHP review of the CR-V.

[lamborghini]

Originally Posted by CrAzY dRiVeR

Coming to the diesel, although Honda claimed the reason for the 120hp variant is VFM in that the 160hp is around 1.5L more expensive in the Indian context, no cost savings passed on to the customer! Even though we get the cheaper 120bhp 1.6 diesel, the pricing is bang against the 3.2L 200ps Endeavours and 2.8L 177ps Fortuners! Skoda Kodiaq and VW Tiguan might face some heat though - as the Honda is known to be far more reliable - but those two were not doing much numbers in terms of sales anyways.

Here's how the segment stands -


Tucson Diesel 6-Speed Automatic 4WD GLS - 2,574,000

VW Tiguan Highline Diesel - 30,87,611


Honda CRV Petrol 2WD - 28,15,000

Honda CRV 1.6 Diesel 2WD 9AT - 30,65,000
Honda CRV 1.6 Diesel 4WD 9AT - 32,75,000



Skoda Kodiaq Diesel - 
Skoda Kodiaq 2.0 TDI AT - 33,83,995

Sure the petrol CR-V will be better than the earlier generation, but is it worth a near 40% on-road price increase compared to the earlier generation 2.0 2WD AT? Will wait for the Team Bhp review to get the final verdict.

Sure the 1.6 120hp diesel is 'enough', but is it worth paying the same price as the 3.2L Ford, 2.8 Toyota and a premium 2.0 DSG Skoda - just for the Honda badge? Will wait for the Team Bhp review to get the final verdict, again.

Thank you for posting this - I was just about to do the same with the CR-V's 3 main contenders. The Compass being a segment below was not included, and the Fortuner / Endy too wasn't included as it is a different audience being catered too.

The Innova though (at INR 22L for the top end ZX Diesel) could have been included as it is the leader in terms of chauffeur driven comfort and reliability.

From what I've seen, I am happy we picked up the VW Tiguan last month at a brilliant deal - undercutting the diesel CR-V by a massive 6 - 7L OTR in Mumbai. I get a similar level of features, better interiors (personal opinion), better build, and can easily spring for a 5 year warranty.

If I really need the extra row of seats - I get the Kodiaq with more luggage space, interior space, features, tech, and engine at a price that undercuts the CRV (3 L discount on select Kodiaq models at the moment).

In fact, VW & Skoda in India is as premium a brand as Honda - with their higher segment vehicles doing fairly well in the niche markets whereas Honda is now focusing more on the mass market (VW has 3 offerings in mass market, and 2 in premium market; Skoda has 1 product in mass market with 3 in premium market, Honda only has 2 in the premium market if you include the dud Accord Hybrid and 6/7 in the mass market).
EDIT: Just to clarify - the Kodiaq and Tiguan are doing quite well compared to the soft-roader SUVs on offer like the VFM Tucson, and old CR-V. The Fortuner is a proper SUV so let's not compare it to this as the customer market too is very different for both.

Plus, with the tucson facelift unveiled globally with some amazing interiors - if that comes to India at current Tucson pricing, it will further impact the CR-V sales.

And let's not forget the discounted BMW X1 as well, with the mid-variant landing at around the same OTR price as the top end diesel CRV AWD. You will lose out on space + AWD but in terms of brand value + interiors + drive, it will have the Honda licked.

But as you rightly said - let's wait for the T-BHP review. Honda still has the ride quality + reliability card which is valued very highly by consumers but would it be enough to overcome the puny 1.6L Diesel engine + high pricing?

Originally Posted by fordfreak

Tucson feels a little underwhelming IMHO.

The Top-end Tucson petrol is priced a whopping 6L cheaper than the CR-V petrol! And then they have added discounts on this and net-net, you could see a 8L price difference OTR between the Tucson Petrol and the CR-V Petrol! Heck, this is more like Santa Fe pricing!
With the new Tucson FL coming out, it'll be worth a watch and worth waiting for IMO.

[mayankjha1806]

https://www.cartoq.com/all-new-honda...yota-fortuner/

The price threshold of Fortuner is set in customers mind (Almost like a benchmark), anything above that with similar or lesser features sounds like failure (Probably the reason why the article focus on that specifically).

When i was shopping for car, we looked at everything that gave us similar features as Fortuner but costs less, we couldn't find any, the story would remain the same even after this launch. I don't believe buyers like me are a minority, there are many like me.

IMHO, Honda should have launched with very aggressive price, to give Fortuner a run for its money.

[Sahil]

Got the car home this morning for a test drive. It was the diesel version 4x4.

Some key points:
- Looks like a beefier and more handsome cousin of the older CRV. Since the older CRV had a futuristic design already, it yet doesn't look as old today. The front end however is greatly improved in the new.

-The diesel engine is noticeably under powered when you push it. No issue if the car is going to be chauffeured but if you enjoy driving a bit spiritedly, this engine will disappoint.
Engine feels strained when pushed. NVH levels are decent. There is some clatter at low speeds though. The petrol will be my pick.

-Leather and interior quality is great. However, it does not have the grandness of the Fortuner's interiors. In the CRV everything is adequate and well appointed- the size, space, quality, etc. There is charm in it's simplicity but it does not have any WOW factors in the interiors.

- The touchscreen is decent. It has minor lag but nothing that would be a hindrance as such. The resolution and graphics of both the screens could have been better.

- Camera mounted on the ORVM that displays on the screen is amazing and very useful. This is one WOW factor that had me mighty impressed with it's usability. You can also leave the camera on at all times for viewing while driving.

- Keyless entry is a nice touch. Unlike the germans where you have to yet press the button to unlock, in the honda you just open the door with the key in your pocket.

- Panoramic sunroof adds a lot to the interior. However, it has a thick partition line as you can see in the pic.

- Suspension is SUPERB! This is the perhaps the most impressive part of the CRV. As expected, it is lightyears ahead of any ladder on frame SUV and i'd put it at par with the BMW X3 suspension which has adjustable dampers.

- Ingress and Egress was top priority for my mother and CRV won on this. In the past I have shown her cars ranging from the new Fortuner to the GLC and she has dismissed all.
She appreciated that the rear doors open 90 degrees and she wouldn't have to jump out or climb in, unlike her Fortuner.

- Leather is soft and feels good with the perforation. I wish they clad the dashboard with the same ivory leather as the seats. The black leather blends in with the black plastic too much. This is where the Fortuners dash looks more grand as the leather is noticeably there in a nice brown color which adds a lot of character.
However, my mom did add that she found the seat cushioning a bit firm but I guess with time the foam will get softer.

- The ivory/light beige leather will be a pain to maintain. Glad that the carpets are black

-Great to see that Honda is giving Michelin 3ST tyres OE!

-Brake hold function works very well and will be a boon in traffic

-Apple carplay does not work via bluetooth, you need to connect it via USB port to your phone

-14k extra for the white color since its a pearl metallic

-Brake pedal feels and sharpness of the breaks is excellent.

- The boot is smaller than the Fortuner. However, the petrol version would be a bit better in this regard.
Loading would be relatively easy.

- Am I impressed? Yes. Am I Mighty impressed? No.
Does it fit my needs and priorities well? Yes.
Am I buying one? Yes!
WHY am I buying one? - The things that didn't impress me about the CRV such as the engine, better resolution/graphics of the touchscreen, etc aren't really a priority for the purpose of me being the car. It is going to be 90% chauffeured and used by my mother.
Hence, what it does better than its competitors is ticks most boxes- understated luxury, ingress degrees best in any SUV, brilliant suspension, cheap to maintain (chauffeur driven cars always wear out more) and last but not the least it checks the safety boxes well too which 6 airbags.