[landcruiser123]

Originally Posted by PrideRed

For anyone who potters around city with 1-3 people, 120HP motor would perform just fine...

If I could compromise the requirement for a 7 seater, I'd buy a Hyundai Tucson. Hyundai diesels are pretty good and the car is significantly cheaper.
They give me 182 BHP and good lower end grunt is guaranteed.

If I need a 7 seater, I'd look at Fortuner/Endeavour.

[PrideRed]

Originally Posted by landcruiser123

If I could compromise the requirement for a 7 seater, I'd buy a Hyundai Tucson. Hyundai diesels are pretty good and the car is significantly cheaper.
They give me 182 BHP and good lower end grunt is guaranteed.

If I need a 7 seater, I'd look at Fortuner/Endeavour.

While in the Engine department, Tuscon will blow out CR-V, interiors of Tuscon are ordinary. This is where CR-V shines. It has soft touch plastics all around and is loaded. The seats feel more upmarket. I checked CR-V,Tuscon and Tiguan back to back and felt Tiguan to be best value. While Tuscon has the best engine, the interiors simply doesnot feel like a 30lac car!

[n.devdath]

Originally Posted by smartcat

Looks like there is just 10 to 20% difference between CR-V and its competitors when we compare power to weight or torque to weight ratios.

True, but that 20% will clearly be felt with 4-5 passengers on board, with and without luggage. Also, the way it performs at traffic signal Grand Prix s, ghat roads will clearly make the driver feel underpowered or the vehicle overstressed.

The CR-V appealed to a certain set of people (NRIs, Intellectual VIPs, well to do ladies, etc) during its heyday because of its refinement, easy of driving and cabin insulation.

Also, it had no competition in what it offered. Today, the market has changed, a lot, and hence I don't see this model going anywhere.

[PrideRed]

Originally Posted by n.devdath

Also, it had no competition in what it offered. Today, the market has changed, a lot, and hence I don't see this model going anywhere.

Trust me, I was under same impression until I saw the car. Agree 120HP motor is severely under powered and will struggle big time. That said the 2.0L motor will bring in some decent numbers and the interiors/features will help some sales of CR-V. Majority of the CR-V spends time in City hauling 2-3 people at max and the 120HP motor would just do fine. ARAI rating of 19.xx KMPL is a bonus given the rising fuel costs.

[AbhiJ]

Originally Posted by PrideRed

Trust me, I was under same impression until I saw the car. Agree 120HP motor is severely under powered and will struggle big time. That said the 2.0L motor will bring in some decent numbers and the interiors/features will help some sales of CR-V. Majority of the CR-V spends time in City hauling 2-3 people at max and the 120HP motor would just do fine. ARAI rating of 19.xx KMPL is a bonus given the rising fuel costs.

I own a 2008 CRV and was waiting eagerly to buy the 2018 one. We love our CRV and were sold on the new one even before launch.

However, am sad to say that after multiple test drives and a lot of deliberation, have decided not to buy the 2018 version.

Reasons:
1) Diesel engine noise during initial pickup, especially in the front seat. 0 to 20 kmph. After the initial noise the engine is not audible. Unfortunately in Kolkata traffic, there are a lot of 0-20.

2) The ride in the rear seat: I actually found the ride in the middle seat to be bouncy, when compared to the Tucson.

3) The 3rd row of seats are ornamental only, no adult with legs can spend time there.

4) The price. The 2WD Diesel is CRV is 8-9 lakhs more expensive than the comparable Tucson, and is squarely in the price range of the Germans. Driving it did not give me the pleasure a 35 lac car should have, plain and simple. The Tucson is a good 25 lakh car with boring interiors but with a much better driving experience for me than the 35 lakh CRV with awesome interiors.

[PrideRed]

Originally Posted by AbhiJ

I own a 2008 CRV and was waiting eagerly to buy the 2018 one. We love our CRV and were sold on the new one even before launch.

However, am sad to say that after multiple test drives and a lot of deliberation, have decided not to buy the 2018 version.

Reasons:
4) The price. The 2WD Diesel is CRV is 8-9 lakhs more expensive than the comparable Tucson, and is squarely in the price range of the Germans. Driving it did not give me the pleasure a 35 lac car should have, plain and simple. The Tucson is a good 25 lakh car with boring interiors but with a much better driving experience for me than the 35 lakh CRV with awesome interiors.

Agree with every aspect you mentioned about engine and 3rd row of CRV. Tuscon had best engine but everything else was a let down. CRV was exact opposite of Tuscon. Tiguan seem to strike the perfect balance. Now for a person who doesnot want own German because of their infamous maintenance cost/reliability and still want luxury, CR-V seems a better bet. Barring motor, CR-V clearly felt a segment above once you are inside.

[M00M]

I own the 2014 2015 CRV and after my test drive of the new diesel awd crv I found it very adequate to drive. It's the perfect D segment car for a city like Mumbai to be driven around in. Provided one can stomach the high price as better options exist at this price.

Honda should've given 160 BHP or not charged such a premium price wise.

Dealers tell me crv isn't selling so Honda is calling old crv owners if they want to upgrade as I received one call too but I am in no mood to sell a 190BHP for a 120 BHP.

[Ithaca]

Originally Posted by M00M

I own the 2014 2015 CRV and after my test drive of the new diesel awd crv I found it very adequate to drive. It's the perfect D segment car for a city like Mumbai to be driven around in.

Sir, were you also provided test drive of the new 2.0 L petrol version.
I would appreciate your inputs regarding the new petrol CR-V with regard to your 2014 2015 CRV.
This vehicle or the face lifted Tucson will be under serious consideration for me next year.
The Kodiaq & Tiguan are not being considered because I do not have the stomach to tolerate their service center shenanigans.

Dealers tell me crv isn't selling so Honda is calling old crv owners if they want to upgrade as I received one call too but I am in no mood to sell a 190BHP for a 120 BHP.

With the pathetic power specs that Honda launched the diesel CRV, everyone and their aunty predicted this was a flop when it was announced.
Not surprised to note it is not selling well.

[M00M]

Originally Posted by Ithaca

Sir, were you also provided test drive of the new 2.0 L petrol version.
I would appreciate your inputs regarding the new petrol CR-V with regard to your 2014 2015 CRV.
.

I have not driven new 2.0 petrol crv 2wd because they did not have it in test drive but when I bought my 2.4 I had driven the 2.0 at that time and it is the same engine mated to CVT while In 2014-15 it was mated to torque converter.

City wise it's adequate. Only time you realise you need extra horses is when you want to pump the speed up quickly to overtake or to catch that gap. Otherwise it is adequate. I found it boringly adequate and I required that extra bump on the highway to over take so I went with 2.4 at that time.

It boils down to your usage, self driven or driver driven. I would say if mileage is high just go for diesel crv . I find the awd more useful as in rain and wet roads the awd feels more surefooted and has given me peace of mind.

Just want to add I'm very impressed with the amount of kit the crv has . Lane watch, coffee cup for drowsy driving, digital dash, Apple car play etc is expected but even materials and LED etc I am impressed with the new crv as mine feels plasticky now compared to new update but driving wise I don't think new crv holds a candle to 2.4 crv .

[Ithaca]

Originally Posted by M00M

I have not driven new 2.0 petrol crv 2wd because they did not have it in test drive but when I bought my 2.4 I had driven the 2.0 at that time and it is the same engine mated to CVT while In 2014-15 it was mated to torque converter.

It boils down to your usage, self driven or driver driven. I would say if mileage is high just go for diesel crv . I find the awd more useful as in rain and wet roads the awd feels more surefooted and has given me peace of mind.

Thank you for your prompt feedback.
Reading your reply, I feel maybe Honda erred in not offering the 2.4 L petrol CRV with the updated features.
For my low mileage and self driven needs, I am keen on the petrol CRV.
I think I will wait for the face lift Tucson to launch and then take a call next Diwali between the two.
Hopefully by then, the Kia Sportage will launch and then I can make a better choice.

[M00M]

Originally Posted by Ithaca

Thank you for your prompt feedback.

Reading your reply, I feel maybe Honda erred in not offering the 2.4 L petrol CRV with the updated features.

For my low mileage and self driven needs, I am keen on the petrol CRV.

I think I will wait for the face lift Tucson to launch and then take a call next Diwali between the two.

Hopefully by then, the Kia Sportage will launch and then I can make a better choice.

I personally don't like Hyundai. I have had a history of buying them and after a year or two of ownership they keep giving lot of maintenance cost as components keep failing. Even fuel efficiency of Hyundai is not good infact they're never fuel efficient.

With Honda's have had good luck so far my city is 7.5 years old and no major issues except routine maintenance.

I think Honda is in the process of discontinuing 2.4 engine so they have gone for 2.0. Also if you see in Japan and china I saw some YouTube video where the 2.0 is mated to a electric and made a hybrid. So I think that maybe a reason why 2.4 was not offered.

Also I feel that fuel efficiency being a concern and people not really needing the awd prompted Honda to launch that only in diesel, but my issue is that why only 120 and why not 160. If you want to give only 120 then price it at 28-29 lacs on road not 36 lacs on road.

In the USA only 1.5 turbo petrol cvt engine is mainstay of new crv now they do have the other petrol engine in lower variants but the newer 1.5 turbo petrol is mainstay in higher variants.

Honda India just doesn't know how to get its act together. 160 BHP in diesel, price slightly lower by few lacs and 1.5 turbo petrol it would've been the sweet spot.

[shankar.balan]

Originally Posted by PrideRed

Now for a person who doesnot want own German because of their infamous maintenance cost/reliability and still want luxury,.

Just asking, why is this impression continually being fostered? In actual fact, just for information, I spend about 18000-22000 per year on the service and maintenance of my Yeti. This includes all the routine things and oil change etc, exactly as per the manufacturer’s time-led maintenance schedule. I dont really find this cost to be excessively terrible. Add the insurance cost of about 20K plus Diesel cost of about 3600 Rs every 45 days,(because of less driving on account of travel) and there you go.

I’m sure, if anyone else wishes to make an internal comparison on how much it costs to maintain a similar segment vehicle, from any other manufacturer, these details will help.

But the main point I’m putting out is that the “impression” that all German / European vehicles are heavy on the pocket, is incorrect as per my experience.

The Yeti was quite costly to buy in 2011 - about 19.5 lacs on road after discount etc. But even today it has lots of features that other, newer vehicles dont have.

To me the CRV was always quite expensive - it used to cost 18-20 lacs in 2006-2007 itself. Now in 2018 it costs almost double that at Rs 28 lacs odd on road. And the Creta top spec costs about 17-18 on road. But it doesn’t have a lot of things in it, which it ought to have, considering the price and in comparison to my Yeti. The Tucson, Compass and other similar vehicles have been priced extremely high too.

This is only my impression and one of the things that is absolutely preventing me from considering an upgrade of vehicle at this moment.

And even if I say it myself, even now, in 2018 Nov, my 7 year old Yeti looks and behaves just like it did, when it was brand new in 2011 Nov/Dec...

[fordfreak]

Took a test-drive of the CR-V this morning (4th November, 2018). I had been planning to buy the petrol variant, but the dealer didn't have a petrol TD vehicle. Asked him to bring over the diesel just to get a feel for it. Summing up my thoughts about the vehicle.

Likes:-

• Design - The new CR-V looks awesome in the flesh. Decent road presence. Overall dimensions felt big for me while driving since I've never owned an SUV before, but I got used to it pretty quick.
• Ride - Felt planted and absorbed nearly all the bumps on the road. Didn't feel bouncy in the rear seat (like in my City). Much needed for the pathetic Kolkata roads.
• Seats - Easy to find a comfortable driving position. Well padded front seats. The rear seats were good, but had poor under-thigh support. I liked the quality of the leather used too. Though the beige colour would be a pain to keep dust/dirt free in the long run.
• Sunroof - I am an absolute sucker for sunroofs in vehicles. The panoramic sunroof really brightened up the interiors.
• Space - Spacious cabin & boot. No complaints there.
• Equipment - Pretty well equipped overall. But there were a few things that should have been included in this price bracket. For e.g. - no hydraulic struts to support the bonnet, no electric tail gate, etc.

Dislikes:-

• Power - The diesel engine felt adequate in city traffic. But the moment you floor the throttle, it fails to deliver. It felt out of breath and tired while trying to pull hard. Hope the petrol CR-V isn't as sluggish.
• Engine Noise - The noise from the diesel engine is audible. Didn't really like that and found it to be quite annoying. Honda could have insulated the cabin better.
• My Dad found it slightly difficult to hop in & hop out of the CR-V due to the height from the ground.
• It barely fits in my garage.

Overall, I liked the CR-V but I don't think we will end up buying it, as the stress of manoeuvring it in & out of our tight parking spot everyday, would be a nightmare. Even a minor miscalculation would result in a scrape. Plus my Dad didn't seem to like it too much.

So the search continues....going to be driving the Passat & Tiguan next weekend.

[PrideRed]

Originally Posted by shankar.balan

Just asking, why is this impression continually being fostered? In actual fact, just for information, I spend about 18000-22000 per year on the service and maintenance of my Yeti. This includes all the routine things and oil change etc, exactly as per the manufacturer’s time-led maintenance schedule. I dont really find this cost to be excessively terrible. Add the insurance cost of about 20K plus Diesel cost of about 3600 Rs every 45 days,(because of less driving on account of travel) and there you go.

For my 3 year old Endeavour in my 3 years of ownership I have spent roughly about 25K on service which also includes a set of brake pads. While additional 10-20K might not be a deterrent for many who spend 30-40lacs on car but for some it does. Take Ford for that matter, they were famous for their expensive maintenance and even now many avoid for the same reason. A BMW/Merc/VW might actually be cheaper to maintain than earlier, but seeing bills of my friends/relatives definitely is not the case when you compare to Toyota,Honda,Hyundai,Ford etc. Yes, the Germans have better Brand value and the additional cost can be attributed to that, but then not everyone is wants to bear the additional maintenance cost. It might still be a "Impression" but they are hard to change by and has a significant impact on car purchase.

[Sahil]

Honda seems to have neglected the Petrol variant production. Allocations are a big issue. Diesel variants are available with dealers but several people have opted for petrol but no inventory coming in.