Just trying to decide what to get. Was thinking of the toyota because the parts are cheaper. Any opinions.
pico42,
Oct 15, 11:56pm
What are you going to use it for!
carmedic,
Oct 16, 12:05am
what vintage are we talking!
mugenb20b,
Oct 16, 12:33am
You didn't read post #3.
mugenb20b,
Oct 16, 12:37am
*Double facepalm*.- .Everything!
mugenb20b,
Oct 16, 12:45am
Nothing wrong with CRVs Scotty. The early ones had weak aluminium rear diff casings and that's about all. Good cars otherwise. Generations 2 and 3 are much better. Honda has never made strong transmissions, but they will last very well if serviced correctly and not doing stupid things with them. RAV4s have had problems too with their first models.
ralphdog1,
Oct 16, 2:48am
Which is all a great rave Scotty, however what about asking the OP what they want it for, cause you are jumping to a whole bunch of conclusions. MrsRalph has a CRV, and whilst I don't like it that much facts are, it is much more roomy inside compared to the RAV4's (carting sacks of chaff etc) and after 7 years and 160k of running (bought it with 90k and now has 250k) it has cost us nothing other than normal routine maintenance inc 2 cambelts etc. And she has never had to walk. So in slagging them off have you owned one!
zak410,
Oct 16, 2:54am
"not to mention they are always driven by people so incompetent they shouldn't even be on the road"
I drive a crv, great work van, no problems, Also I have done rallies in the past, done 1000km in motorbike in Le Mans 3 times, driven trucks intentionally in Europe for a few years, you, Scotty, what??
ralphdog1,
Oct 16, 2:57am
Your problem Zak (as no doubt will be mine) is you don't drive a V8 Holdumb
trdbzr,
Oct 16, 3:06am
Wrong. Scotty bangs on about V6 Holdens, not V8s.
ml6989,
Oct 16, 3:08am
Give me a CRV any day Scotty, in fact I own one. My wife drives it mostly and it is always serviced and never caused any grief. As for your comment about the drivers of CRV's being incompetent, explain what the type of driver has to do with the rating of the vehicle! You have completley gone off topic and lost your way. In answer to original post: CRV is the better vehicle in my opinion. BTW, had a Rav (2003) at work a while ago, loosing water. Turned out to be 3 head stud threads in block were stripped, apparently one of those problems they have that no one wants to admit to.
ralphdog1,
Oct 16, 3:17am
Anyway OP, as long as you understand the limitations of that type of vehicle, as a member of a family that has one (and maintainer) my opinion is there is nothing wrong with the CR-V
ml6989,
Oct 16, 3:44am
Never seen one snapped yet. Keep calm, your Rav may blow a head gasket if it builds up as much pressure as you have. I still say CRV!
franc123,
Oct 16, 4:03am
Neither.A Suzuki Escudo/Vitara is what you should buy, otherwise if you're not going offroad, get an ordinary 2WD car like an Accord or a Caldina and forget the Tonka toys with the pretend 4wd systems.
spongefrisk,
Oct 16, 4:04am
X-Trail!
zak410,
Oct 16, 5:05am
Agree, I used to have a Vitara, (1600 mind you), went everywhere even with a trailer full of firewood, but my crv takes me to any building sites for work where 2wd (even Holden utes!) cannot reach, fact!
Have run CRVs for last 15 years. They may look bland but non have ever missed a beat or given a moments trouble.Serviced by Honda , first class.Roomier than the Rav but each to their own. Would take either over the hyped up expensive BMWs etc. any day.
richardmayes,
Oct 17, 6:26pm
Scotty, please; too much information.
O.P: I've done a fair few miles in a 2004-era rav4. It was a new car then so I can't comment on the reliability. But it was a good functional little town car with excellent visibility (being high) and it made a surprising amount oftorque for a little 4 cylinder engine so it was nice to drive. It didn't have the handling of a car but it was plenty adequate for sensible driving. All we ever used it for off-road was driving across muddy building sites and the metalled access roads to them - it was certainly enough 4x4 for that. Had none of the low ratio transfer gears, winches or any of the other serious machinery that proper off-roading requires, but then we had no need for any of that.
wilgil,
Oct 18, 1:21am
I downgraded from 3L surf to CRV. Works well for what I want - towing/launching/retrieving the boat, carting the smelly dogs around, 6-hour trips from Picton to Timaru, LIGHT 4WDing to remote fishing spots. Now has 260,000ks. Everything still working - apart from the rear windscreen wiper! Be nice to be able to actually select 4WD though.
phillip.weston,
Oct 18, 1:33am
I'm pretty sure the RAV4 4WD system works very similarly to the CR-V, that is that it's mostly FWD until slippage is detected and then the rear wheels get power.
socram,
Oct 18, 1:36am
For what it is worth, 2 friends have CRVs and have recently upgraded to later models, although one older one needed a new gearbox and the other had an annoying intermittent electrical problem and was also heading for a major expense. It didn't stop them getting later ones.
Daughter has a high mileage RAV 4 and the paintwork is just dreadful and I hate driving it (gutless wobbly porridge) but she is happy enough.
For us, we are now on our third Freelander in ten or 11 years and wouldn't consider a CRV or RAV, despite many of the regulars on here rubbishing them.
It often comes down to your personal preferences (or bias) and there is nothing wrong with that.
moosie_21,
Jan 1, 7:07am
Is Scotty actually defending a 4 cylinder motor car made by the totally incompetent Thai people of this world! My word, what has happened!
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.