honda crv vs explorer

[camaro_guy_z28]

http://online.wsj.com/public/article...500773150.html
Pretty depressing article. How can u even call the crv a suv its just a civic with a lift kit. At least the explorer is still a true suv even though ford made it into a minvan.

[IZwack]

Originally Posted by camaro_guy_z28

..the explorer is .. a true suv ..... ford made it into a minvan.

so which one will it be? SUV or MiniVan?

[badge49]

apples vs. oranges

[pumpkin]

Originally Posted by badge49

apples vs. oranges

True. It's is smaller, lighter, weaker, and a 4 banger. Not in the same class.

[Paraphoe]

Depressing nonetheless.

[Bwana Bob]

Yes, its sad. The definition of "SUV" has been blurred. Anything that has a trunk bigger than a sedan and more than 5 inches of ground clearance is called an SUV. Explorer-like vehicles should be reclassified as light trucks, or maybe "Truck, Utility Vehice" (TUV).

I thought that the Ford Escape was the best selling small SUV, but I guess now the CR-V beats it. I rode in a new CR-V recently and it was pretty nice, but I hate the styling, though Honda was smart to get rid of the rear spare tire carrier. The CR-V looks feminine to me as opposed to the Escape. (Ford has gone the same curvy hatchback route with the Edge). Ford has got the Escape styling right (IMHO), but they need to improve the fuel economy and the reliability of the drivetrain. V6 Escapes only get slightly better gas mileage than an Explorer. The 2.3L I4-equipped Escapes are good on fuel economy, but are underpowered. Ford needs to put in the 3.5L V6 and the 6-speed tranny.

People buy Hondas for the fuel economy and the "legendary" reliability. I don't know how reliable or maintainable they really are. I have no expereince in maintaining Hondas.

Sure, CR-V vs. Explorer is an apples to oranges comparison, but the game has changed. Now most people want:

1) Fuel economy.
2) Styling that women like.
3) Fuel economy.
4) Handles like a car, and "whats 4-low for?"
5) Fuel economy.

Bob

[FROADER]

I they do an off-road test, the 2wd Explorer (or any make for that matter) won't be a "true SUV" then either. All an SUV is, is a lifted station wagon, plain and simple. It doesn't matter how big or small, what engine it has or if it's 2wd or 4wd.

[pumpkin]

Originally Posted by Bwana Bob

People buy Hondas for the fuel economy and the "legendary" reliability. I don't know how reliable or maintainable they really are. I have no expereince in maintaining Hondas.

Honda had major problems with automatic transmissions failing from '99 to '04(Acura models too). My '02 Odyssey tranny was replaced in '05 with 71K miles on the clock. It was free of charge. The only other thing is the body and paint. Both gets damaged rather easily w/ small dents, chips and scratches.

[rizzjc]

The CR-V still has a long way to go to even come close to lifetime Explorer sales. I just hope that it's not the end of the Ex, like they say in the article.

[UKExploder]

Originally Posted by Bwana Bob

Yes, its sad. The definition of "SUV" has been blurred. Anything that has a trunk bigger than a sedan and more than 5 inches of ground clearance is called an SUV. Explorer-like vehicles should be reclassified as light trucks, or maybe "Truck, Utility Vehice" (TUV).

I thought that the Ford Escape was the best selling small SUV, but I guess now the CR-V beats it. I rode in a new CR-V recently and it was pretty nice, but I hate the styling, though Honda was smart to get rid of the rear spare tire carrier. The CR-V looks feminine to me as opposed to the Escape. (Ford has gone the same curvy hatchback route with the Edge). Ford has got the Escape styling right (IMHO), but they need to improve the fuel economy and the reliability of the drivetrain. V6 Escapes only get slightly better gas mileage than an Explorer. The 2.3L I4-equipped Escapes are good on fuel economy, but are underpowered. Ford needs to put in the 3.5L V6 and the 6-speed tranny.

People buy Hondas for the fuel economy and the "legendary" reliability. I don't know how reliable or maintainable they really are. I have no expereince in maintaining Hondas.

Sure, CR-V vs. Explorer is an apples to oranges comparison, but the game has changed. Now most people want:

1) Fuel economy.
2) Styling that women like.
3) Fuel economy.
4) Handles like a car, and "whats 4-low for?"
5) Fuel economy.

Bob

If you want Japanese quality vs FoMoCo quality, it's definitely an apples to oranges story from the get-go don't you think?

[97greenmonster]

I cant see the explorer dieing, i talk to most people by where i live, and they love my ex over their hondas, and trailblazers etc. The only realy problem i see with them is the MPG. they plain out suck. But thats not why you by and explorer. Its sad to see people switching over to the japanese market for mpg and they "reliability factor". The explorers are and EXTREAMLY reliable beasts. and its also sad to see people discriminating over them because of the firestone deal, i correct people all the time, its not and exploder, its an explorer. I dont see it dieing, but is it fading. For needs to offer that 3.5 with the 6 speed as a base motor, like the OHV was years ago and offer the SOHC and 4.6 as an option. That was a sad article for explorer owners everywhere.

[UKExploder]

Originally Posted by 97greenmonster

I cant see the explorer dieing, i talk to most people by where i live, and they love my ex over their hondas, and trailblazers etc. The only realy problem i see with them is the MPG. they plain out suck. But thats not why you by and explorer. Its sad to see people switching over to the japanese market for mpg and they "reliability factor". The explorers are and EXTREAMLY reliable beasts. and its also sad to see people discriminating over them because of the firestone deal, i correct people all the time, its not and exploder, its an explorer. I dont see it dieing, but is it fading. For needs to offer that 3.5 with the 6 speed as a base motor, like the OHV was years ago and offer the SOHC and 4.6 as an option. That was a sad article for explorer owners everywhere.

What is the saddest thing nowadays is that you have to buy a Expedition or Excursion to get what a 1st gen. Explorer was and is... .....but still I say " Long live 1st gen. Explorers".....they can have my keys for mine when they pry them from my dead gripping hand... ....if the US would just devise a small diesel engine the MPG battle would be won.....the "UK sister car" the Ford Maverick 4x4 is selling still with a 2.7L V6 diesel {around 40+ mpg}

[Bwana Bob]

Originally Posted by UKExploder

What is the saddest thing nowadays is that you have to buy a Expedition or Excursion to get what a 1st gen. Explorer was and is... .....but still I say " Long live 1st gen. Explorers".....they can have my keys for mine when they pry them from my dead gripping hand... ....if the US would just devise a small diesel engine the MPG battle would be won.....the "UK sister car" the Ford Maverick 4x4 is selling still with a 2.7L V6 diesel {around 40+ mpg}

Diesels are not too popular in the U.S., due to air pollution issues, cold starting, etc. However, there are now some "clean Diesel" designs out there, plus the possibility of bio-diesel fuel (derived from soybeans, not the French fry oil). Last year I was in Delhi, India and I saw the Ford Endeavour. It looked just like an Explorer, but with a Diesel engine. With Congress again talking about higher fuel economy standards for light trucks, maybe its time for a turbo-Diesel Explorer.

In the meantime, I'll just keep nursing my 1st Gen Ex.

Bob