Honda CR-V Wins Vehix Small SUV Comparison Test

Really in depth comparison test, great read, I just put the basic's from the article, make sure you you read the full article....

1ST Place: 2011 Honda CR-V
Overall Score: 7.3 out of 10
Likes
-Comfortable seats
-Simple yet innovative interior packaging
-Lively driving character in urban environments
-Top quality and dependability ratings
-Holds its value over time
Dislikes
-Limited availability of technology features
-Accessing engine power means revving the engine
-Transmission regularly exercises its hunting permit
-Choppy highway ride
-We’re thinking, we’re thinking…
The Vehix View
Honda appeals more to the head than the heart with the 2011 CR-V, an utterly practical, extremely comfortable, exceptionally reliable, and genuinely fun-to-drive crossover SUV.

2nd Place: 2011 Chevrolet Equinox
Overall Score: 7.2 out of 10
Likes
-Styling
-Comfort
-Ride and handling
-Safety features and crash-test scores
-Impressive warranty coverage
Dislikes
-Fuel economy
-Powertrain refinement
-Confusing controls
-Visibility
-Narrow cargo area
The Vehix View
Thanks to a solid middle-of-the-road performance, the 2011 Chevrolet Equinox slips into 2nd place in our comparison test. All it really needs is a more fuel-efficient and refined engine, minor reconfiguration of the interior, and better quality scores to lead the pack.

3rd Place: 2011 Toyota RAV4
Overall Score: 7.1 out of 10
Likes
-Impeccable build quality
-Lots of fun to drive
-Simple controls and displays
-Roomy cargo area
-Impressive gas mileage
Dislikes
-Few frills, premium price
-Cheap interior materials
-Seat comfort, front and rear
-NHTSA crash-test results
-Silly cargo door with spare tire stuck to it
The Vehix View
The fun-to-drive Toyota RAV4 is due for a redesign, and we hope the next version features improved interior materials, better crash-test scores, and more comfortable seats. Toyota can ditch that rear cargo door, too.

4th Place: 2011 Hyundai Tucson
Overall Score: 6.8 out of 10
Likes
-Interior design, materials and layout
-Lots of technology for the price
-Engine, transmission, and fuel economy
-Killer warranty and assurance programs
-IIHS Top Safety Pick
Dislikes
-Front styling
-Rear-seat comfort
-Rear visibility
-Steering feel
-Ride quality
The Vehix View
With improvements in rear-seat comfort, steering, ride quality, and independent ratings for quality, reliability, and expected depreciation, the Tucson would dominate the competition.
Drawing Conclusions
It may sound trite to admit, but based on our four-vehicle comparison test, there’s no clear winner or loser among this group. Each of the CUVs we drove gives the consumer a compelling reason to purchase, and each one possesses a potential flaw that a consumer might find impossible to live with. Despite this, we’ve driven the miles, crunched the data, and determined which of these four is the best of the bunch.

The Hyundai Tucson (view photos) smells like a bargain, thanks to impressive features, a competitive sticker price, and an industry-leading warranty. Add a high-quality interior, a Top Safety Pick crash-test award, and a best-in-test real world fuel economy number, and we understand why it’s hard to fathom its fourth-place finish. The trouble with the Tucson is that it is a chore to drive. The steering requires constant correction and maintenance, the ride is busy and bouncy, and visibility to the rear is poor. Plus, rear seat occupants – especially those old enough to talk but not tall enough to see past the Tucson’s towering door panels – are likely to squawk about claustrophobia.

The Toyota RAV4 (view photos) is a popular choice because it is roomy and simple, delivering impressive gas mileage and build quality for a low price. But that low price is deceiving, because you’re not getting many frills, and the Toyota’s interior looks and feels the cheapest of the group. Seat comfort is merely adequate, the cargo door is unwieldy, and the NHTSA’s new battery of crash tests reveals potentially inadequate passenger protection in some types of accidents. Negatives aside, perhaps the most surprising thing about the RAV4 is that it is fun to drive. Most people think Toyotas are nothing more than sleeping aids on wheels. When it comes to this CUV, that’s definitely not the case.

The Chevy Equinox (view photos) offers a compelling blend of emotional and practical reasons for purchase, from its good looks and comfortable interior to its impressive warranty coverage and favorable crash-test scores. However, based on our driving we think the EPA’s fuel economy estimates for the unrefined four-cylinder powertrain are out of line with reality. Plus, it’s hard to see out of the Equinox, the controls are often a source of confusion, and the cargo space is almost too narrow to accommodate a full-size stroller. While there is certainly room for improvement, the Equinox is definitely worth investigation.

The Honda CR-V (view photos) is the small crossover that we would recommend to friends and family, because it makes life easier. Brimming with practicality, the lively little CR-V is deceptively roomy inside with very comfortable seats, innovative cargo and storage solutions, and simple controls. Add top quality and dependability ratings and the ability to hold its value over time, and the Honda CR-V makes a clear case for purchase. All Honda really needs to do is make Bluetooth standard across the board, and we can forgive the CR-V’s relatively minor flaws.

Source;
http://www.vehix.com/articles/reviews/small-suv-comparison-test/1

Vancouver Sun: CRV Review: A compact sport-ute evolution

First introduced in 1997, the Honda CR-V is nearing the end of what has been a successful third generation of this compact utility vehicle. It was the first utility vehicle produced by Honda and has been an unqualified hit both for this auto maker and with its owners . . . just ask one.

Outstanding in terms of its reliability and excellent resale value retention, the CR-V has evolved over the years and the 2011 edition has also embraced a more stylish cross-over design trend.

Yet, it still retains excellent interior functionality and off-the-beaten track driving capability.

Last year, CR-V received a mid-life cycle refit, receiving more power out of its one and only engine without compromising fuel economy. Its 2.4-litre four-cylinder powerplant employs variable intake valve timing and can now produce 180 horsepower. That’s an eight per cent increase in power, plus a four per cent improvement in fuel economy was also achieved.

Engineering tweaks used to achieve the power boost included a higher compression ratio, larger intake valves, lower-friction piston rings, and fuel injectors that deliver a finer spray. The engine’s maximum torque is unchanged at 161 lb.-ft, but it’s achieved at a slightly higher 4400 rpm.

All 2011 models come with a five-speed automatic transmission and drive is sent to the front wheels or all four, via Honda’s Real Time 4WD. It’s a system that doesn’t involve any driver decisions and defaults to front-drive for best fuel economy.

Built on a rigid unit-body structure, the CR-V has no noteworthy changes for the 2011 model year, unless you count some new paint colour choices. Buyers also get to choose from three models: the basic LX; mid-range EX; the top-line EX-L, which comes with leather-upholstery and there’s a navigation package option.

The Looks
The requisite two-box utility design configuration is almost unrecognizable in the 2011 CR-V. Long gone are the days when its spare wheel hung on the rear door. It sports a cleaner, more car-like design these days, with prominent fender flares that give it a solid and planted appearance on the road.

Tapered side windows add to the sporty fast-back look of CR-V and at the rear there are distinctive tall high-mounted taillights. The rear liftgate design is also unique in that this door spills over into bumper. The idea is that it provides a lower cargo entry way, which lines up with a perfectly flat cargo floor. That said, the liftgate does look like it`s more venerable to rear-ender damage.

The Inside: The big inside pull-handles on the doors, which look like engine connecting rods, fit-in with the decidedly practical personality of the CR-V’s interior. There`s no third-row seat to expand seating to seven or even eight people, like some competitors. Instead, the CR-V offers comfortable seating for five and lots of cargo room.

Head and leg room in the rear seat are generous; passengers can also slide their feet under the seat in front, and the split (60/40) seats have high backrests that recline. To increase cargo space the rear seatback first folds and then the entire seat tumbles forward against the back of the front seat.

Up front, there’s a second and smaller (upper) glove box with a multimedia USB connection inside. The transmission shift lever on a pedestal sticks out from the centre stack and there’s storage underneath. In fact, there are all kinds of storage nooks and pockets in the CR-V.
And my top-line EX-L trim came with a centre console between the front seats.

Safety
The NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) in the US has introduced tougher crash test program with a more stringent new 5-Star Safety Rating system that’s no longer comparable to 1990–2010 vehicles.

The 2011 Honda CR-V received four-star ratings (out of five) in front, side rollover and overall ratings. That’s as good, if not better, than any other small compact utility vehicle that the NHTSA has tested to date.

An electronic stability system, called Vehicle Stability Assist, is standard on all CR-Vs. It’s also coupled with four-wheel disc brakes (vented in front and solid in the rear), ABS, brake assist and electronic brake-force distribution.

The Drive
It’s easy to understand why this size of utility vehicle has become so popular. It’s small enough to park with ease and use in an urban environment. The seat height makes it easier for many people to slide in or out and that extra height also gives occupants better all-around vision.

Driver vision in the CR-V is very good, the back window is large and the side mirrors are also an extra-large size. My test CR-V came with a backup camera, which comes with the optional navigation system package.

You sit tall in the driver’s seat in a more chair-like seating position, looking down at the instrument cluster, and a wide left-foot dead pedal is a welcome feature. In addition to the added comfort, it can be used to brace the left leg in an emergency braking situation.

Honda has, commendably and like some of its competitors, resisted chucking a V6 engine in to the CR-V to get more power. It’s a move that should pay off in the long run, if as predicted we are moving into a season of higher fuel costs.

A five-speed automatic transmission matches well with the four-cylinder engine. There`s an overdrive on/off button on the side of the shift lever that gives the driver limited control over shift functions, as manually down-shifting with the level is cumbersome.

The CR-V handled better than expected and is more stable while cornering than most in this class. The steering is on the light side, a little too much assist for my taste, but it is precise. Most impressive was low level of interior noise, even a highway speeds.

The Score
The Honda CR-V is a sturdy vehicle and a benchmark in the compact utility class . . . a “can’t go wrong” purchase.
The Specs
2011 Honda CR-V
Trim levels: LX, EX & EX-L
Sticker Price: $26,290 to $35,590
Power (SHO): 2.4-litre I4, 180-hp
Transmission: 5-speed automatic
Fuel consumption (fwd):
9.8/7.1 L/100 km (city/highway)
Fuel consumption (awd):
10.1/7.5 L/100 km (city/highway)
Basic Warranty: 3 yrs / 60,000 km
Powertrain Warranty: 5 yrs / 100,000 km
Rust Warranty: 5 yrs / unlimited km

The competition
Ford Escape: $24,499 - $34,549
Hyundai Tucson: $22,995 - $34,449
Kia Sportage: $21,995 - $35,995
Mazda CX-7: $26,495 - $36,690
Nissan Rouge: $23,198 - $33,098
Toyota RAV4: $24,345 - $34,390
Source;
http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/compact+sport+evolution/4328232/story.html#ixzz1EnXnlyqJ

Cars.com: $29,000 SUV Shootout: The Results

Here's an interesting review, done by a interesting choice of reviewers, didn't know that Joey Lawrence was a car guy (mind you, I do seem to remember him being a mechanic on his show). I find it frustrating that one of the biggest cons against the CRV is style, which in my opinion is one of the most subjective things when reviewing a vehicle.... can't wait for the 2012, although I have no problems with the 2011.

Which SUVs?
How did we pick these SUVs? In many cases, we let the automakers pick them. We talked to J.D. Power & Associates to see which SUVs consumers cross-shopped with the Chevrolet Equinox and the Hyundai Santa Fe. They came back with this list: Honda CR-V, Toyota RAV4, Ford Escape, Kia Sorento, GMC Terrain and Dodge Journey. We looked at sales popularity and found all eight had sold at least 17,000 through April 2010. A couple of others — Subaru Forester and Nissan Rogue — merited inclusion because of their sales popularity, and a handful didn't make the cut due to a lack of sales. We allowed only one SUV per automaker, so GM had to pick either an Equinox or a Terrain.That left us with a set of compact/midsize crossovers scattered across a wide price spectrum. We returned to J.D. Power to investigate the group's median transaction price. J.D. Power reported a $6,500 spread, from $25,361 for compact crossovers to $31,844 for midsize crossovers. Splitting the difference gave us $28,603, which we rounded up to $29,000. What do you get for $29,000 on these SUVs? This is what they come with.

The Rules
Then we set the rules for automakers: We wanted an SUV or a compact or midsize crossover that fit under $29,000. Automakers had to provide a Monroney sticker to prove each car came in under that price (excluding destination charges). It needed to have an automatic transmission. We also gave them specifics about our target family: It would be a family of four who would use this SUV as their primary vehicle. The family would be based in Southern California, meaning they would spend a fair amount of time in traffic together, and that might also explain why most automakers did not give us a car with all-wheel drive.The automakers made different — and interesting — choices. Rather than going with their midsize Santa Fe and Sorento, Hyundai and Kia (respectively) elected to give us well-equipped versions of their smaller Tucson and Sportage. Similarly, Ford and Nissan opted against a stripped-down Edge and Murano (respectively), going instead with a well-equipped Escape and Rogue. Chrysler, it turned out, was the only automaker that stuck with a truly midsize entrant.

The Testing
We put the SUVs through a number of tests, including a full day of testing by the experts, a full day's examination by our test family guided by our team of experts, and a full day's mileage drive. The tests were conducted in early December in Southern California around the Pasadena area.

The Scoring
Judging the SUVS were:
Kristin Varela, chief mom for Cars.com and editor of MotherProof.com
David Thomas, senior editor for Cars.com
Jennifer Newman, editor for Cars.com and MotherProof.com
Chris Woodyard, reporter and editor for USA Today
Brian Robinson, producer for "MotorWeek," the longtime public television automotive show
Joey and Chandie Lawrence. Joey is the star of "Melissa and Joey" on the ABC Family network. They are the parents of two young girls.

The experts' opinions make up 65 percent of the score; the Lawrence family, 25 percent. Fuel economy makes up the final 10 percent of the final score.See what our experts and family found, and let us know what you think as well.

The State of the SUV/Crossover Segment

The Family

Mileage Challenge

Results

http://www.cars.com/go/crp/buyingGuides/Story.jsp?year=New&section=SUV&story=crossoverResult&subject=stories&year=New