And although I am not crazy about the HR-V(I don't hate it either) but, my wife absolutely loves it!
Last edited:
Test Drove 2016 Honda HR-V
- Thread starter CharBaby
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Char Baby
Compelling argument for another $23K-$26K Honda(Civic EX/Accord LX or Sport/Honda CR-V EX @ $26K+)... I have driven these 3 other Honda's mentioned and I think that they're better for the money!
We purchased a '10 Civic LX new for $16K but wish we would have ponied up the $4-5K more for the Accord strictly on road noise. A lot more car for the money than the Civic which the HRV spawns from.
Compelling argument for another $23K-$26K Honda(Civic EX/Accord LX or Sport/Honda CR-V EX @ $26K+)... I have driven these 3 other Honda's mentioned and I think that they're better for the money!
We purchased a '10 Civic LX new for $16K but wish we would have ponied up the $4-5K more for the Accord strictly on road noise. A lot more car for the money than the Civic which the HRV spawns from.
I agree. My daughter bought 2014 Accord LX for around $21k + tax and license, it is a much more car than the Civic LX at $17-18k.
Originally Posted By: Shrubitup
Originally Posted By: Char Baby
Compelling argument for another $23K-$26K Honda(Civic EX/Accord LX or Sport/Honda CR-V EX @ $26K+)... I have driven these 3 other Honda's mentioned and I think that they're better for the money!
We purchased a '10 Civic LX new for $16K but wish we would have ponied up the $4-5K more for the Accord strictly on road noise. A lot more car for the money than the Civic which the HRV spawns from.
Actually, the HR-V spawns from the Honda FIT chassis.
Uses the Honda Civic 1.8L engine.
Some/Most AWD parts from the CR-V
And the CVT from the Accord(modified for AWD)
What IDK is, how much of the CR-V AWD parts are used?(Could just be the programming)!
Does the CR-V use the Accord CVT also?(modded of AWD useage)?
*And, none of this info^^^ is confirmed. Most of the info I have found is kind'a sporadic and sketchy from auto reviewers!
There is so much speculation on the HR-V as to, how much of the other Honda product line does the HR-V use???
Either way, the HR-V doesn't feel as though it uses any other part from the lineup!
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
I agree. My daughter bought 2014 Accord LX for around $21k + tax and license, it is a much more car than the Civic LX at $17-18k.
Yes, even the more expensive trim line of the Civic(EX/EX-L/Nav), make a compelling argument for an Accord LX or SPORT!
But, I think that most automakers are this way! i.e...
I would rather buy a lesser expensive Mazda6 SPORT over a Mazda3 Touring/Grand Touring. But, this is just me!
Originally Posted By: Char Baby
Compelling argument for another $23K-$26K Honda(Civic EX/Accord LX or Sport/Honda CR-V EX @ $26K+)... I have driven these 3 other Honda's mentioned and I think that they're better for the money!
We purchased a '10 Civic LX new for $16K but wish we would have ponied up the $4-5K more for the Accord strictly on road noise. A lot more car for the money than the Civic which the HRV spawns from.
Actually, the HR-V spawns from the Honda FIT chassis.
Uses the Honda Civic 1.8L engine.
Some/Most AWD parts from the CR-V
And the CVT from the Accord(modified for AWD)
What IDK is, how much of the CR-V AWD parts are used?(Could just be the programming)!
Does the CR-V use the Accord CVT also?(modded of AWD useage)?
*And, none of this info^^^ is confirmed. Most of the info I have found is kind'a sporadic and sketchy from auto reviewers!
There is so much speculation on the HR-V as to, how much of the other Honda product line does the HR-V use???
Either way, the HR-V doesn't feel as though it uses any other part from the lineup!
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
I agree. My daughter bought 2014 Accord LX for around $21k + tax and license, it is a much more car than the Civic LX at $17-18k.
Yes, even the more expensive trim line of the Civic(EX/EX-L/Nav), make a compelling argument for an Accord LX or SPORT!
But, I think that most automakers are this way! i.e...
I would rather buy a lesser expensive Mazda6 SPORT over a Mazda3 Touring/Grand Touring. But, this is just me!
Last edited:
Actually, the HR-V spawns from the Honda FIT chassis.
Uses the Honda Civic 1.8L engine.
Some/Most AWD parts from the CR-V
And the CVT from the Accord(modified for AWD)
What IDK is, how much of the CR-V AWD parts are used?(Could just be the programming)!
Does the CR-V use the Accord CVT also?(modded of AWD useage)?
*And, none of this info^^^ is confirmed. Most of the info I have found is kind'a sporadic and sketchy from auto reviewers!
There is so much speculation on the HR-V as to, how much of the other Honda product line does the HR-V use???
Either way, the HR-V doesn't feel as though it uses any other part from the lineup!
_____________________________________________________________
Actually from my understanding, the HR-V's CVT is more closely related to the Civic(not the Accord) and is modified for AWD useage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMFb43JnPCc
Uses the Honda Civic 1.8L engine.
Some/Most AWD parts from the CR-V
And the CVT from the Accord(modified for AWD)
What IDK is, how much of the CR-V AWD parts are used?(Could just be the programming)!
Does the CR-V use the Accord CVT also?(modded of AWD useage)?
*And, none of this info^^^ is confirmed. Most of the info I have found is kind'a sporadic and sketchy from auto reviewers!
There is so much speculation on the HR-V as to, how much of the other Honda product line does the HR-V use???
Either way, the HR-V doesn't feel as though it uses any other part from the lineup!
_____________________________________________________________
Actually from my understanding, the HR-V's CVT is more closely related to the Civic(not the Accord) and is modified for AWD useage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMFb43JnPCc
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Char Baby
Yes, even the more expensive trim line of the Civic(EX/EX-L/Nav), make a compelling argument for an Accord LX or SPORT!
But, I think that most automakers are this way! i.e...
I would rather buy a lesser expensive Mazda6 SPORT over a Mazda3 Touring/Grand Touring. But, this is just me!
Yep, this is pretty typical. The higher trims of the lower segment car encroach (or exceed) the price of the lower trims of the higher segment car. Great examples on Civic w/ leather vs. Accord with cloth, or Mazda 3 with leather vs. Mazda 6 with cloth, or Chevy Cruze with leather vs. Chevy Malibu with cloth, etc.
The HR-V is based to some degree on the Fit. I don't know how strong the resemblance is. It does share the same design on the fuel tank (under the driver's seat), and the same rear "Magic Seat" design. I don't know if certain hard points or geometries at the same.
The CR-V is "based" on the Civic, but I always found a direct link hard to make, personally. All hard points are completely different; the CR-V has a completely different rear suspension/cradle design; the CR-V is wider and longer than a Civic; the CR-V has available AWD where the Civic does not (so exhaust configuration is completely different); etc. Earlier generations of the CR-V were more closely related to the Civic in terms of suspension design, but each chassis has really gone its separate way for over a decade and two or three generations by now.
Yes, even the more expensive trim line of the Civic(EX/EX-L/Nav), make a compelling argument for an Accord LX or SPORT!
But, I think that most automakers are this way! i.e...
I would rather buy a lesser expensive Mazda6 SPORT over a Mazda3 Touring/Grand Touring. But, this is just me!
Yep, this is pretty typical. The higher trims of the lower segment car encroach (or exceed) the price of the lower trims of the higher segment car. Great examples on Civic w/ leather vs. Accord with cloth, or Mazda 3 with leather vs. Mazda 6 with cloth, or Chevy Cruze with leather vs. Chevy Malibu with cloth, etc.
The HR-V is based to some degree on the Fit. I don't know how strong the resemblance is. It does share the same design on the fuel tank (under the driver's seat), and the same rear "Magic Seat" design. I don't know if certain hard points or geometries at the same.
The CR-V is "based" on the Civic, but I always found a direct link hard to make, personally. All hard points are completely different; the CR-V has a completely different rear suspension/cradle design; the CR-V is wider and longer than a Civic; the CR-V has available AWD where the Civic does not (so exhaust configuration is completely different); etc. Earlier generations of the CR-V were more closely related to the Civic in terms of suspension design, but each chassis has really gone its separate way for over a decade and two or three generations by now.
Amazing that the CR-V shares the platform/chassis with the Civic. As the Acura RDX shares the platform/chassis with the CR-V. Civic is never mentioned. Is this Civic/CR-V sharing still in effect?
I did have a chance to drive an RDX and although I don't really want to spend $40K on vehicles anymore, I did very much enjoy the driving experience with the RDX.
Very nice in fact! Nothing felt cheap with the RDX(as it shouldn't!). A good AWD value for $36K-$37K w/o the TECH Pkg(no NAV). But, prices can climb quickly to >$43-$44K in a hurry!
I don't want to confuse things in this post by including the ~$40K vehicles in this segment.
I did have a chance to drive an RDX and although I don't really want to spend $40K on vehicles anymore, I did very much enjoy the driving experience with the RDX.
Very nice in fact! Nothing felt cheap with the RDX(as it shouldn't!). A good AWD value for $36K-$37K w/o the TECH Pkg(no NAV). But, prices can climb quickly to >$43-$44K in a hurry!
I don't want to confuse things in this post by including the ~$40K vehicles in this segment.
Last edited:
The CR-V does NOT share a platform with a Civic. The CR-V is related to the Civic platform, and looked more like a Civic underneath when it was introduced in the late 1990s. But both platforms, the CR-V and Civic, have matured on their own and don't resemble each other at all anymore, at least in my opinion. For what it's worth, Wikipedia's wording is the CR-V "was loosely derived from the Honda Civic". Based on my experience with both, I'd say that's accurate.
You'll sometimes hear someone say that the CR-V is a jacked up Civic with a hatch. That's about as accurate as saying that Mobil 1 is Mobil Clean 5000 with some extra additives...but it's still said nonetheless.
The RDX was related to the CR-V when it was first introduced. It used a different rear suspension design, but it was still similar otherwise. I think it, too, has diverged some and has matured on its own. I've driven a 2014 RDX and the difference between it and my 2008 CR-V was quite notable. As you know, the RDX now comes with the J35 engine, where it previously was available only with the K23 (a turbo 2.3L variant of the K24). So I'm sure there were some chassis modifications and enhancements to support the larger V-6 engine.
You'll sometimes hear someone say that the CR-V is a jacked up Civic with a hatch. That's about as accurate as saying that Mobil 1 is Mobil Clean 5000 with some extra additives...but it's still said nonetheless.
The RDX was related to the CR-V when it was first introduced. It used a different rear suspension design, but it was still similar otherwise. I think it, too, has diverged some and has matured on its own. I've driven a 2014 RDX and the difference between it and my 2008 CR-V was quite notable. As you know, the RDX now comes with the J35 engine, where it previously was available only with the K23 (a turbo 2.3L variant of the K24). So I'm sure there were some chassis modifications and enhancements to support the larger V-6 engine.
Originally Posted By: DriveHard
...and the Mazda CX-3 looks about a zillion times better ;-)
The HR-V has the back-door setup similar to the Compass. With the awkward flare and hidden door handle. Looks like a Jeep Compass and a Hyundai Santa Fe (little) made a baby.
The CX-3 looks nice, though. Hoping for manual, AWD. But it won't happen.
...and the Mazda CX-3 looks about a zillion times better ;-)
The HR-V has the back-door setup similar to the Compass. With the awkward flare and hidden door handle. Looks like a Jeep Compass and a Hyundai Santa Fe (little) made a baby.
The CX-3 looks nice, though. Hoping for manual, AWD. But it won't happen.
Yes, the J35 engine & 6 spd auto tranny are certainly a nice package in the RDX.
Something to be mindful of when considering a small car is the turning radius. Some small vehicles are not as agile and maneuverable as their compact size would suggest. As listed below, the little HRV is no more nimble than the bigger CRV.
Turning radius':
2016 Honda HRV FWD 37.4 feet.
2015 Honda CRV FWD 37.5 feet.
2016 Mazda CX3 FWD 34.8 feet
2016 Mazda CX5 FWD 36.7 feet.
Lesson learned when I bought a Scion XD. Tiny car, big turning circle (37.1"). Very frustrating in many situations.
Turning radius':
2016 Honda HRV FWD 37.4 feet.
2015 Honda CRV FWD 37.5 feet.
2016 Mazda CX3 FWD 34.8 feet
2016 Mazda CX5 FWD 36.7 feet.
Lesson learned when I bought a Scion XD. Tiny car, big turning circle (37.1"). Very frustrating in many situations.
Originally Posted By: Char Baby
But, I think that most automakers are this way! i.e...
I would rather buy a lesser expensive Mazda6 SPORT over a Mazda3 Touring/Grand Touring. But, this is just me!
And me too ! Lower trim level of a more substantial car is a much better value.
But, I think that most automakers are this way! i.e...
I would rather buy a lesser expensive Mazda6 SPORT over a Mazda3 Touring/Grand Touring. But, this is just me!
And me too ! Lower trim level of a more substantial car is a much better value.
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Originally Posted By: Char Baby
But, I think that most automakers are this way! i.e...
I would rather buy a lesser expensive Mazda6 SPORT over a Mazda3 Touring/Grand Touring. But, this is just me!
And me too ! Lower trim level of a more substantial car is a much better value.
Oh, absolutely!
Originally Posted By: Char Baby
But, I think that most automakers are this way! i.e...
I would rather buy a lesser expensive Mazda6 SPORT over a Mazda3 Touring/Grand Touring. But, this is just me!
And me too ! Lower trim level of a more substantial car is a much better value.
Oh, absolutely!
Sticker on my 14 Rav4 FWD was 28k, pretty much a base model.
For Rochester, you would want 4wd, and you would want something with some ride height.
I lived in Buffalo for 30 years.
You can get into a new forrester for 23-24k for a base model with AWD.
Tons of my friends in WNY have subaru's and they work well in the tough climate.
Reliability is not as great as honda or toyota, but the awd is very well done.
For Rochester, you would want 4wd, and you would want something with some ride height.
I lived in Buffalo for 30 years.
You can get into a new forrester for 23-24k for a base model with AWD.
Tons of my friends in WNY have subaru's and they work well in the tough climate.
Reliability is not as great as honda or toyota, but the awd is very well done.
Sounds like a pass for us. AWD would be nice. A good set of snow tires has gotten our Fit most all the places it needed to, though. Spending $25k OTD for Honda compact AWD doesn't make sense to me. "It has AWD! I don't know why it didn't stop!"
My mother purchased one recently; for her, it's a great car. Plenty utilitarian, with ample trunk space, the fold up/down seats etc. It's generally a good car, from my experience. Not unpleasant to drive. It is louder than I thought; you can feel the Fit's roots. However, that 'we didn't even bother putting carpet in this car" maneuver bothers me. The rest of the materials are nice; this is an EX-L model, but the omission of anything resembling carpet is offensive.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Rob_S
The rest of the materials are nice; this is an EX-L model, but the omission of anything resembling carpet is offensive.
Is it literally just a vinyl floor? That may appeal to many, especially in the target segment. They don't have to buy rubber floor mats to protect carpet from muddy hiking boots or salty snow shoes, etc.
The rest of the materials are nice; this is an EX-L model, but the omission of anything resembling carpet is offensive.
Is it literally just a vinyl floor? That may appeal to many, especially in the target segment. They don't have to buy rubber floor mats to protect carpet from muddy hiking boots or salty snow shoes, etc.
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: Rob_S
The rest of the materials are nice; this is an EX-L model, but the omission of anything resembling carpet is offensive.
Is it literally just a vinyl floor? That may appeal to many, especially in the target segment. They don't have to buy rubber floor mats to protect carpet from muddy hiking boots or salty snow shoes, etc.
I think he's talking about that really low pile carpet that is similar to what they use in the trunk being used on the passenger compartment floor. It's almost like felt.
Originally Posted By: Rob_S
The rest of the materials are nice; this is an EX-L model, but the omission of anything resembling carpet is offensive.
Is it literally just a vinyl floor? That may appeal to many, especially in the target segment. They don't have to buy rubber floor mats to protect carpet from muddy hiking boots or salty snow shoes, etc.
I think he's talking about that really low pile carpet that is similar to what they use in the trunk being used on the passenger compartment floor. It's almost like felt.
Originally Posted By: dishdude
I think he's talking about that really low pile carpet that is similar to what they use in the trunk being used on the passenger compartment floor. It's almost like felt.
Cheap felt-like carpet wouldn't bother me, as long as they used a decent sound-attenuating material underneath. Given that it's a Honda, they probably did not. But even real carpet probably wouldn't add much in terms of muffling anyway.
Honda likely observed that most buyers in this segment either are, or think they are, the younger active set and immediately buy rubber floor mats to protect what's there from their active lifestyle. So they may have asked themselves, "why spend money on something they're going to cover up anyway?"
In general, I agree though -- floor coverings have gotten cheaper and thinner over time.
I think he's talking about that really low pile carpet that is similar to what they use in the trunk being used on the passenger compartment floor. It's almost like felt.
Cheap felt-like carpet wouldn't bother me, as long as they used a decent sound-attenuating material underneath. Given that it's a Honda, they probably did not. But even real carpet probably wouldn't add much in terms of muffling anyway.
Honda likely observed that most buyers in this segment either are, or think they are, the younger active set and immediately buy rubber floor mats to protect what's there from their active lifestyle. So they may have asked themselves, "why spend money on something they're going to cover up anyway?"
In general, I agree though -- floor coverings have gotten cheaper and thinner over time.
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: dishdude
I think he's talking about that really low pile carpet that is similar to what they use in the trunk being used on the passenger compartment floor. It's almost like felt.
Cheap felt-like carpet wouldn't bother me, as long as they used a decent sound-attenuating material underneath. Given that it's a Honda, they probably did not. But even real carpet probably wouldn't add much in terms of muffling anyway.
Honda likely observed that most buyers in this segment either are, or think they are, the younger active set and immediately buy rubber floor mats to protect what's there from their active lifestyle. So they may have asked themselves, "why spend money on something they're going to cover up anyway?"
In general, I agree though -- floor coverings have gotten cheaper and thinner over time.
It's lower quality than any trunk carpeting in any car I've ever seen; it is literally that bad. The contrast is bizarre; much of the dash and door surrounds use pleasant soft touch plastics; there's a nice leather(ish) steering wheel etc. Ironically enough, the trunk carpeting is of a much higher quality. Other than that, it's a nice place to be. It's just a strange choice in my eyes. I get it, beancounters and so on, but I'm really not exaggerating with this.
Being that the car is based off of the Fit, I'm assuming it's the same thing they use in that car. It's application is understandable when looking at the Fit's price point, but for a car with this sticker it is a bit offensive.
The car isn't all that quiet, either. I was actually surprised in that respect. I guess it's the Fit roots showing.
Originally Posted By: dishdude
I think he's talking about that really low pile carpet that is similar to what they use in the trunk being used on the passenger compartment floor. It's almost like felt.
Cheap felt-like carpet wouldn't bother me, as long as they used a decent sound-attenuating material underneath. Given that it's a Honda, they probably did not. But even real carpet probably wouldn't add much in terms of muffling anyway.
Honda likely observed that most buyers in this segment either are, or think they are, the younger active set and immediately buy rubber floor mats to protect what's there from their active lifestyle. So they may have asked themselves, "why spend money on something they're going to cover up anyway?"
In general, I agree though -- floor coverings have gotten cheaper and thinner over time.
It's lower quality than any trunk carpeting in any car I've ever seen; it is literally that bad. The contrast is bizarre; much of the dash and door surrounds use pleasant soft touch plastics; there's a nice leather(ish) steering wheel etc. Ironically enough, the trunk carpeting is of a much higher quality. Other than that, it's a nice place to be. It's just a strange choice in my eyes. I get it, beancounters and so on, but I'm really not exaggerating with this.
Being that the car is based off of the Fit, I'm assuming it's the same thing they use in that car. It's application is understandable when looking at the Fit's price point, but for a car with this sticker it is a bit offensive.
The car isn't all that quiet, either. I was actually surprised in that respect. I guess it's the Fit roots showing.
Last edited:
- Status
