2007 Honda CRV

Last Updated:

More official pictures of the CRV for the US.
Engine is the same with a slight bump in power to 166.
And 5 speed auto for all models.

There are now 4 models starting in “the low 20’s”. Whatever that really means.
A top model EX with navigation, leather and 270 watt stereo including a flash card slot will go for a bit under $28 000.

That is a lot of money .
Even if you compare it with the new RAV4, which is about the same price with a V6. But no navigation.

Is the new CRV too expensive???

Conversation 19 comments

  1. Not cheap but not overpriced. The market for small SUVS is going to be strong for awhile. It seems that people are getting out of their mid size and large SUVs at a shocking rate. They have to downsize to save money and it seems that most of them don’t want to lose the up high feeling of the SUV. A co-worker just bought a full size Toyota Sequoia and is spending $150 a week on gas. He wish he had got something smaller and probably will when he trades it in.

  2. When you’re that stupid (by not knowing a Sequoia will cost you in gas), you deserve to spend $150 a week in gas…

  3. I always think that if you pay more than 35k on a car/ truck, gas price is only a minor pain. Think about tires, insurance, depreciation, and repairs.

  4. to me , Almost all Japanese makers are overpriced these days(exception may be Suzuki), Big 2.5 always need rebates, thus, they must be overpriced, too, or just not what the public wants( gas hogs, just like that Toyota Sequoia!)
    VW is really the over priced king, compared to all automakers, forwhat you get!!!!!

    That’s alright, by 2015, the Chinese will be in full force, and have decent cars by then.
    All for thousands less(as one report I read,detnews? not sure…. said, 19K car, loaded and built like a 30K car…for Chery).
    Then they all will have to watch out, and meet the threat.

    PS: not saying Honda, et al are horrible vehicles, just most are over priced.
    Buy what ya like, it’s yer money, not mine.

  5. Whatever the price, I wouldn’t pay a dime for a vehicle with that front end attached.

    Too bad, it’s probably a good SUV.

  6. I’m really torn about the HP. You’d think they would have offered a turbo 4 cyl option with about 190 hp at least to have something to go up against the Rav’s 6cyl. I bet they will soon enough. On the other hand if the torque and gears are set right then 160 might just be enough and the good mileage may trump the extra HP these days. Maybe they’re setting us up for a hybrid with about 190 hp. AND better mileage. Wouldn’t that be great.

  7. Well considering the Element as the smaller(?) cheaper SUV here…they probably wanted to differ the two so price had to be one of the ways. But IMO it is a lil pricey…start at $18,000. And with that front end and funky rear windows they should go cheaper than $18,000.

  8. The new CR-V is no thing of beauty but the RAV4 is a bust as I see it. The RAV4’s dumb, spare tire hangs off the back and becomes the rear bumper–a bad idea. The CR-V finally eliminated the hanging spare in back.
    And the RAV4’s rear, “D” pillar is ugly IMO.
    If the CR-V’s 4 cylinder engine is powerful enough for the CR-V’s weight, it should be OK. My ’04 Accord has the 2.4L, 160HP engine and it’s plenty quick–smooth, too.

  9. Its a 4 cylinder vehicle! Come on. On Toyota’s website, $25K for a Camry Hybrid. Much better value.
    If you really need the SUV, then the RAV4 appears to be a better deal, 4 or 6 cylinder.

  10. No V6, no problem. The Audi Q5 will (probably) have a V8 engine with 350+hp. Does that mean that all small SUVs should come with V8s? Hell no.

    People buy small SUVs because they are efficient, spacious, and get better mileage than huge body-on-frame SUVs and give them the same invincible feelings as huge(er) gas guzzling(er) SUVs.

  11. A diesel will be out in a year or two. I’m saddened by the lack of power too. Motortrend estimated 0-60 in 10 SECONDS. That’s bad. But not any worse than the RAV4 4cyl. I can’t wait for that diesel.

    The front end is on the borderline of Subaru Tribeca and Pontiac Aztec. Ugly

  12. Actually, except for the strange-looking nose, the new CR-V is a very nice vehicle. I like the clean, spare instrument panel and even the shifter placement is good. But the best part is that with the 2WD versions, you get 23 mpg city, 30 mpg highway fuel efficiency, pretty good for this class of vehicle.

    Probably starting in the 2008 model year (e.g., fall 2007), Honda will likely offer a new 2.3-liter I-4 turbodiesel rated at 145-150 bhp but with a very high torque peak. It will likely sport 25-33% better fuel efficiency than the K24 derivative engine used on the 2007 CR-V. Of course, given Honda’s recent patent on a new diesel emissions control technology, the engine will fo course meet EPA Tier 2 Bin 5 and CARB 2007 diesel emission standards, too.

  13. I don’t know if the front is as bad as the Aztec or Tribeca, but it ain’t pretty. That’s for sure.

  14. Good Bye CR-V.

    I feel totally betrayed by Honda: no manual grea box. For how long will have to adjust our market to fat mommas who have no idea how to drive? Good Bye, CR-V.

  15. This new version of the CR-V looks like a HIDEOUS GROUPER FISH with it’s OPEN LARGE LOWER LIP sticking out at you! Once again, Honda DARES to market a mini sized MINI-VAN in North America! They tried once before with the 1st generation Odyssey and the Isuzu Oasis clone! Both failed miserably in volume sales, but at least they had the magic disappearing folding 3rd row seat that could also be used for tailgate seating and the Odyssey and Oasis looked 100%better! The new CR-V doesn’t even offer this neat option! It didn’t take long for Americans to forget this and are primed to be fooled once again!

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *