Not impressed with the Honda HR-V

[Blanky]

I think crossover is just a term that has been created to make people feel better about getting what amounts to little more than a raised hatchback. People want an SUV, but they are too pricey, so they get a "crossover". Check out a Prius V

 

[Kaido]

Should have gone with eyesight without nav. The nav is terrible. That combo is only available on the premium.

Welcome to the club. We have a limited but no nav/eyesight.

I find the location of the backup cam better up high. Looking down at the nav screen seems dumb to me.

It is nicer up high, I just wish it was angled towards the driver instead of the middle of the backseat haha. Also, it's pretty small. But from looking at it, they put a pretty deep hood on it, so I'd imagine that's to make it more daylight-readable.

Yeah, I didn't want nav, but they had it on the lot & dropped the price down to the point where it was acceptable, plus I can swap it out for a Carplay unit if I want & eBay the stock unit, so it worked out okay.

I like it so much I may have to look at an Outback when my Civic lease is up :thumbsup:

 

[Kaido]

I think crossover is just a term that has been created to make people feel better about getting what amounts to little more than a raised hatchback. People want an SUV, but they are too pricey, so they get a "crossover". Check out a Prius V

Hah right? They try to call the Forester a crossover...it's just a stationwagon

 

[Kaido]

Prius, Volt, Civic Hybrid, all started off with smaller engines and they increased their displacement a tad because they found better fuel economy with a larger displacement. Every vehicle for a given curb weight has an ideal engine displacement for most driver habits. The only people who can get away with a smaller displacement/less power motor are hypermilers because today's drivers are far more aggressive in accelerating than in the past. On the CAFE fuel economy test cycle, the Prius gets better fuel economy from the larger 1.8L engine but hypermilers have found that they get slightly better fuel economy out of the 1.5L engine in the '04-'09 Prius.

I just saw that they're trying to clear out the backlog of Volts - now $35k for what cost $41k:

http://blog.caranddriver.com/chevrolet-throwing-money-at-the-volt-to-clear-out-huge-backlog/

Plus the $7500 tax credit drops it down to $26k. Although the new model is due out soon & gets 50 miles of EV range, which is a lot more usable. Their lease right now is $0 down, $249 a month, which is very attractive because my typical daily commute is just under 50 miles & it looks like my work would be open to letting me charge up there, so I could basically drive for free all week, but still have the gas backup if I needed to go somewhere.

 

[Art&Science]

Chrysler did it right, physical buttons and touch screen.

The controls are duplicated, but the climate menu on the console (touchscreen) has more options (heat/cool seats, raise/lower sun shade, heat steering wheel, etc).

 

[Subyman]

I think crossover is just a term that has been created to make people feel better about getting what amounts to little more than a raised hatchback. People want an SUV, but they are too pricey, so they get a "crossover". Check out a Prius V

There is a use for them. I agree, generally people buy them for looks and the SUV presence. A relative does in-house therapy for children. The small crossovers are perfect because she needs decent MPG, winter/gravel/worn road capability, plenty of easily accessible storage for therapy gear, and a decent price range because of the mileage the vehicle sees every year. That is a very specific use though lol.

She used a Jetta for awhile. Recently she is getting to the end of a Cruze's life (at only 115k...) and is looking to get something a bit more rugged.

 

[996GT2]

Chrysler did it right, physical buttons and touch screen.

Honda/Acura had it right 10 years ago with their nav systems. Touchscreen + physical controls for audio and HVAC on the center console + redundant physical controls for audio/bluetooth on the steering wheel.

 

[SSSnail]

I think crossover is just a term that has been created to make people feel better about getting what amounts to little more than a raised hatchback. People want an SUV, but they are too pricey, so they get a "crossover". Check out a Prius V

Pretty crappy thing to say in a garage thread. People get what the hell ever they want, and there are plenty of uses for a small SUV in a lot of settings. Get off your uppity high car, whatever that might be.

 

[heymrdj]

Honda/Acura had it right 10 years ago with their nav systems. Touchscreen + physical controls for audio and HVAC on the center console + redundant physical controls for audio/bluetooth on the steering wheel.

Except the Chrysler family has arguably the best infotainment system currently in vehicles while the Hondas still have glorified 40$ Tom Toms mounted in the dash. Their crap is seriously embarrassing to even look at.

 

[bamx2]

Great review. I was waiting for HR-V but am taking it off the list.

 

[nerp]

Yeah, sorry, I meant to say interior temp. But what I said still stands. If the inside of the car is 75 and you have the AC set to 70, the fan speed will be slower than if you have the AC set to 60. The system tries to balance the fan speed so that you get cooling while minimizing fan noise. However, if you set the temperature knob down at 60, the system will assume you don't care about fan noise and run the fan on full blast.

That's how it works in my Accord, anyway.

In my Dodge, it's different and behaves the way you would if you were fiddling. Auto temp set to 73 on a 90 degree day when the car has been baking in the lot means it screams until it cools down inside the cabin and gradually winds down until it's not noticeable anymore and keeps the temp steady. If I park in my garage and it's 73 degrees in there and 90 outside, the fans aren't even running while set on auto until the sun outside has started to heat up the car a bit then you hear the fan gradually start increasing speed to keep the temp level. Lowering or raising the temp or playing with fan speeds doesn't make a difference. If auto is lit and the temp difference between desired and actual temp is large, it will go full blast at first until it starts to stabilize.

I generally leave mine on auto unless it's humid out but not too hot. I like to force off the A/C and crack the windows and the system will detect the humidity and force the A/C on even if it's not really hot. In manual mode, I can nix the A/C and keep the air flowing without the chill of A/C. Otherwise, auto mode is nice. We drove up a mountain in NH last summer and it was neat how the system gradually went from hot temps on the ground to around freezing at the summit and the system transitioned from cooling to heating so smoothly. Funny to watch the outside temp on the dash drop like a stone while the inside of the car feels exactly the same.

One other advantage of auto (if done right) is that it only blows right in your face if it needs to. Once it finds a stable temp, it tends to close those vents up and just circulate air quietly without lots of blowing.

 

[nerp]

I think crossover is just a term that has been created to make people feel better about getting what amounts to little more than a raised hatchback. People want an SUV, but they are too pricey, so they get a "crossover". Check out a Prius V

I would argue that there might be more Prius V drivers out there needing a little pick-me-up than crossover drivers.

 

[tortillasoup]

I don't like automatic climate control because on cold days, it causes the engine to warm up slower. Even if I turn off the climate control, if the last setting was "hot", the valve for the heater core is still actuated so heat will be running through there unless I manually adjust the temperature for "cold", wait for it to close the valve then shut off the system. On a manual system, I just flick the heat all the way to cold until it's fully warmed up then switch back to heat. Obviously this could be automated to be done but it isn't.

 

[michal1980]

I don't like automatic climate control because on cold days, it causes the engine to warm up slower. Even if I turn off the climate control, if the last setting was "hot", the valve for the heater core is still actuated so heat will be running through there unless I manually adjust the temperature for "cold", wait for it to close the valve then shut off the system. On a manual system, I just flick the heat all the way to cold until it's fully warmed up then switch back to heat. Obviously this could be automated to be done but it isn't.

This has to be car dependent.

The two cars I had with auto climate would basically turn the system off until the car warms up.

 

[nerp]

This has to be car dependent.

The two cars I had with auto climate would basically turn the system off until the car warms up.

Same. On cold days, the system isn't running on Auto mode until the coolant temp reaches a certain point. It won't blow any air until the air is somewhat warm. This coincides with the moment the oil temp begins to increase. On extremely cold days like the ones we had this past winter, it might be a few solid minutes before it turns on at all.

 

[Kaido]

Great review. I was waiting for HR-V but am taking it off the list.

Yeah, I was sad that I didn't like it as much as I had hoped for, I was really excited about it! We really loved our Fit, but this didn't feel like the drop-in AWD Fit replacement we were looking for. I also didn't care for the newly redesigned Fit, either - didn't like the CVT or the redesign, especially the lack of cupholders.

On the flip side, the Subaru has been wonderful so far, so much so that I am thinking about one for my car down the road too. The CVT is waaaaay better than Honda's, and I would say it edges out Nissan's latest CVT as well. It seems like a car that you never really have to think about again...basic, low-profile, sturdy, reliable. I can see why people like them!

 

[theeedude]

They shouldn't have touch screen or physical buttons. Just an app for your phone

 

[tortillasoup]

This has to be car dependent.

The two cars I had with auto climate would basically turn the system off until the car warms up.

If I put an OBD-II reader on there, I bet you'd see the car wasn't at operating temperature before the heat started to come out of the heater core. Unless the temp sensor says the car is at least 180F or 160F in the case of the Prius, prior to switching the heat on, the car is delaying its warmup.

 

[996GT2]

I don't like automatic climate control because on cold days, it causes the engine to warm up slower. Even if I turn off the climate control, if the last setting was "hot", the valve for the heater core is still actuated so heat will be running through there unless I manually adjust the temperature for "cold", wait for it to close the valve then shut off the system. On a manual system, I just flick the heat all the way to cold until it's fully warmed up then switch back to heat. Obviously this could be automated to be done but it isn't.

On my car, the system waits for the heat to reach a "warm" temperature before it turns on the fan, so that it's not blowing ice-cold air in your face. This typically takes around 5 minutes on a cold day (< 30F outside). Usually the temp needle has just started to move around this time.

Sure, the heat starts coming on before the car is fully warmed up, but I prefer that to waiting an extra 5 minutes for the car to be fully warmed up (needle at the middle of the temp gauge) before any heat comes into the cabin. That would be annoying to deal with every day during the winter. Besides, after the heat comes on, it only takes about 5 minutes for the engine temp to reach the middle mark on the gauge, so it's not like the delay in warming up the engine is anything significant, if at all.

 

[tortillasoup]

On my car, the system waits for the heat to reach a "warm" temperature before it turns on the fan, so that it's not blowing ice-cold air in your face. This typically takes around 5 minutes on a cold day (< 30F outside). Usually the temp needle has just started to move around this time.

Sure, the heat starts coming on before the car is fully warmed up, but I prefer that to waiting an extra 5 minutes for the car to be fully warmed up (needle at the middle of the temp gauge) before any heat comes into the cabin. That would be annoying to deal with every day during the winter. Besides, after the heat comes on, it only takes about 5 minutes for the engine temp to reach the middle mark on the gauge, so it's not like the delay in warming up the engine is anything significant, if at all.

I consider 5 minutes very significant. Cold start is where all the wear, carbon build up, oil dilution, etc. happens. The faster the car warms up, the better for the environment AND the car. I want the car to warm up as quickly as possible so it's running in its ideal fuel mixtures. Also "blowing the fan" and not running heat through the heater core aren't the same thing. Just running heat through the heater core means a serious delay in engine warming up and my guess is the climate control system wont blow air through the heater core until it's at temperature. A heater core is basically a little radiator. Having heat run through there is like having a leaky thermostat if you're trying to warm up the vehicle.

 

[theeedude]

I

Needs more ventilation for the passenger, maybe a second row of vents.