7.5 seconds to 60 is leisurely?? I think most people out there would find that to be planning decent, if not quite brisk for an SUV. when I think leisurely, I think more like 9 to 10 seconds.
I was just thinking the same thing. Hell if you had a car in the early 2000 that went to 60 in 7.5 seconds that same announcer was praising it on how quick it was.
When is 7.5 0-60 mediocre ? That's quite good for a crossover or whatever this is classified as. I'm pretty sure only the 2.0T shortage is quicker 0-60 at 6.7 if I'm not mistaken so the Honda is plenty fast, a majority of CRV buyers aren't going to complain about performance.
I was just coming down here to say the same thing. It wasn't *that* long ago that 7.5 was considered decent for a small quasi-sportscar. We're getting to the point that engine power is actually far exceeding what's safe for most idiots on the road.
MW's Review of the diamond star 1984 Conquest sports car said that its 0-60 time of 10.1 was breath taking! It had a 2.4 turbo. I remember thinking when I drove it was awesome! I now own a 2017 CRV. I love everything about it, especially the stellar fuel economy. Why is 0-60 in 7.5 mediocre when I get 34 mpg at the same time? I know technology is better..still seems interesting
I wish my car went 0-60 in 7.5 seconds! In another video, I forgot what car he was testing he said the car accelerated to 60 in a ok 6.4 seconds! Is he kidding me? The 90s trans m did that and he called it super fast!
Certainly the new Honda had improved a lot of crappy features over my 2014 CRV; foot pedal parking brake, lack of arm rest, slightly bigger seats (still too small for men), and more torque. However, they had lost me as a customer for a 2017/2018 CRV and 2018 Accord since only the turbo and CVT are available on both models. The digital dash, smaller fuel tank and complex entertainment panel also turned me off.
Small 14 gallon fuel tank. Stupid. You would be lucky if you got 325 miles out of it before you had to fill up. Warm it up in the winter, less efficient cold, higher ethanol fuel blend, and you will be lucky to get 300 miles. For it's size it could have had a 16-19 gallon capacity.
Even at 28mpg and 13 gallons so as to leave a safety cushion it’s still 364 miles per tank. And at highway mpg even at a low 31 mpg and still 13 gallons for a buffer, it’s 403 miles per tank. I’m guessing simple math isn’t your forte’.
i don't know what it is about the new cr-v but I don't like it as much as the older ones. My mom had a 2nd gen that I learned to drive with. Much easier to drive than my dads pilot. these new ones look almost bigger than my dads old honda pilot. We need more actual small SUVs. No more "crossover SUV" nonsense.
helloish12321 The new CR-V is only 2.5 inches longer than the original. That's nothing, essentially the same size when you factor in the spare tire carrier. The original Accord compared to the current one is about 20 inches longer.
Bought a '17 EX-L for 28K and change. I first drove competing makes - Escape, CX-5, Rav4, Forester, Chevrolet, Buick, VW, Rogue, Kia and Mitsubishi. The most bang for the buck was the CRV - Leather, heated seats, interior noise level, sensing package, adequate power, excellent braking, great sound system, blind spot warning and a very workable CVT. I am 74 years old and this will likely be the last car that I will need to buy as I am positive it will outlast me and make a great car for one of my grandchildren. There was nothing really terrible about any of the others, but the CRV was the best package for me.
![[UNCUT] “บอสณวัฒน์” ลากไส้!! ใครหนุนหลัง "แม่ตั๊ก ป๋าเบียร์" I คนดังนั่งเคลียร์ I 30 ก.ย. 67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QlD7mU2KKRk/mqdefault.jpg)
![[Full Episode] The Restaurant War Thailand ศึกพ่อค้าซ่าแม่ค้าแซ่บ Episode 2 | 29 ก.ย. 67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/r3lfLNH6Ke4/mqdefault.jpg)
ive been watching this guy sense i was a kid every sunday after church
Me too, on my local public tv station.
So have I since 1998.
7.5 seconds to 60 is leisurely?? I think most people out there would find that to be planning decent, if not quite brisk for an SUV. when I think leisurely, I think more like 9 to 10 seconds.
Thanks for doing a proper road test with the instrumented results. That's the only reason I come to watch Motorweek over the other channels.
I've been watching motor week for so many years. I'm glad there still around!!!
Yeah John Davis is still a great host to this day.
My dad just bought one today. Glad he got this over a Civic or Accord. He's 72 and I'm happy for him.
Love it that Motorweek now thinks 7.5 seconds to 60 MPH is slow. Just think 30 years ago 12 seconds was about average. How times change
I was just thinking the same thing. Hell if you had a car in the early 2000 that went to 60 in 7.5 seconds that same announcer was praising it on how quick it was.
Judging by this review, I can safely say that this might just be the best CR-V yet!!!!!!
When is 7.5 0-60 mediocre ? That's quite good for a crossover or whatever this is classified as. I'm pretty sure only the 2.0T shortage is quicker 0-60 at 6.7 if I'm not mistaken so the Honda is plenty fast, a majority of CRV buyers aren't going to complain about performance.
Amen
The 2.0T EcoBoost Escape is only 0.2 seconds faster despite having significantly more power.
I was just coming down here to say the same thing. It wasn't *that* long ago that 7.5 was considered decent for a small quasi-sportscar. We're getting to the point that engine power is actually far exceeding what's safe for most idiots on the road.
Came here to say exactly that! 7.5 seconds mediocre? WTF? That's like Q3, X2 speed.
MW's test track has really let it go since the 80's
Definitely better than the 4th gen CR-V and thanks Honda for bringing back a volume knob
7.5..slow..? Isn't that best in class? What're you guys comparing it too?
Fadic 4 I guess a damn sports car @ that point.
Jo LC 7.5 0-60. 33 mpg highway.awd(new system). Lightest in the class. Safest in the class..Apple car play/android auto..
Fadic 4 completely agree, that's a quick time for a 1.5l powered SUV !
Came in to say the same thing.
You can probably get 7.2 if you brake launch it lol. But I highly recommend against it
Pat, were you having a bad day? 7.5 seconds with awd is awesome for a small suv. Nothing leisure about that!
Now, I REALLY feel old............the CR-V is 20 YEARS OLD NOW!!!!!!!!!!!
MotorWeek and Entertainment Tonight are the same age. They will be starting season 37.
It's 2018 and this dude is ripped right out of the 90s lol
I like the older boxy crv
That SUV is beautifully designed
MW's Review of the diamond star 1984 Conquest sports car said that its 0-60 time of 10.1 was breath taking! It had a 2.4 turbo. I remember thinking when I drove it was awesome! I now own a 2017 CRV. I love everything about it, especially the stellar fuel economy. Why is 0-60 in 7.5 mediocre when I get 34 mpg at the same time? I know technology is better..still seems interesting
Why not turbocharge the 2.4L
I don't like where the gear is. Finger tip is better. And it's the seventh generation Honda CR-V not fifth as mentioned by John Davis.
gene patrick 97-01 02-06 07-11 12-16 17- ..... 5 generations in the US
I wish my car went 0-60 in 7.5 seconds! In another video, I forgot what car he was testing he said the car accelerated to 60 in a ok 6.4 seconds! Is he kidding me? The 90s trans m did that and he called it super fast!
no more dual screens
Is it really reliable though?
look how the front wheels buckle in during the slalom .. scaryyy
Waingro, is that you?
Getting one of these from a 2012 vw Passat diesel, never buying a vw again
lol on the Toyota break test car, that's funny Honda
A 7.5 sec 0-60 time is NOT slow! HUMKRUGUMDOY!!!
Certainly the new Honda had improved a lot of crappy features over my 2014 CRV; foot pedal parking brake, lack of arm rest, slightly bigger seats (still too small for men), and more torque. However, they had lost me as a customer for a 2017/2018 CRV and 2018 Accord since only the turbo and CVT are available on both models. The digital dash, smaller fuel tank and complex entertainment panel also turned me off.
91 or even 93 and turn up the boost ! 😂
Small 14 gallon fuel tank. Stupid. You would be lucky if you got 325 miles out of it before you had to fill up. Warm it up in the winter, less efficient cold, higher ethanol fuel blend, and you will be lucky to get 300 miles. For it's size it could have had a 16-19 gallon capacity.
Even at 28mpg and 13 gallons so as to leave a safety cushion it’s still 364 miles per tank. And at highway mpg even at a low 31 mpg and still 13 gallons for a buffer, it’s 403 miles per tank. I’m guessing simple math isn’t your forte’.
I get 420 avg luv my crv plus it's a hoot to drive.
i don't know what it is about the new cr-v but I don't like it as much as the older ones. My mom had a 2nd gen that I learned to drive with. Much easier to drive than my dads pilot. these new ones look almost bigger than my dads old honda pilot. We need more actual small SUVs. No more "crossover SUV" nonsense.
helloish12321 The new CR-V is only 2.5 inches longer than the original. That's nothing, essentially the same size when you factor in the spare tire carrier. The original Accord compared to the current one is about 20 inches longer.
Why is he reviewing this in a suit jacket? Smh 🤦♂️
Dang i think he read the wrong script, 7.5secs 0-60 is mediocre? Lol
Better buy triple A
The car looks bulky fat.
Couldn't watch this because of that guy's crazy inflections, he needs voice coaching
That voice made him millions! He has been in the business for a long time. His style is old school. It's still fun to listen to him.
too bad, NO v6
Mule Butt Crv.
continuously hideous tail lights
the ex and above will cost you 30k out the door, more expensive than the rest of the competition
Benjamin Navarro Every single last one of it's direct competitors will go over $30,000 as well. It is no more expensive than the others.
Bought a '17 EX-L for 28K and change. I first drove competing makes - Escape, CX-5, Rav4, Forester, Chevrolet, Buick, VW, Rogue, Kia and Mitsubishi. The most bang for the buck was the CRV - Leather, heated seats, interior noise level, sensing package, adequate power, excellent braking, great sound system, blind spot warning and a very workable CVT. I am 74 years old and this will likely be the last car that I will need to buy as I am positive it will outlast me and make a great car for one of my grandchildren. There was nothing really terrible about any of the others, but the CRV was the best package for me.
You can buy an EX AWD for 27K OTD.
Haha 7.5 sec mediocore? Just watched a retro video with 0-55 of 20 secs. 7.5 seems pretty quick.