pbm317

You realize that the V6 is gone from the new gen RAV right?

Lexmex

Knowing some people south of the border with both recently new...the RAV4. You can't go wrong with the CRV, and I'd dare say that between Honda and Toyota cars (not SUVs) the argument is a lot closer, but on the SUV side the RAV4 is an edge in front. Particularly, I hear things about better maneuverability.

SteVTEC

Not really, and what makes you think the engine is under-rated?

The V6 was one of the best things about the RAV4, so it's a shame they discontinued it without offering any sort of optional engine. Still prefer the Nissan VQ's. More torque below 4k. Dunno why but Toyota tuned the 2GR-FE to drive like a Honda.

97-SC300

iTrader: (17)

The CRV engine is a POS from a driver's standpoint. It's like driving a mule it's so slow. It's dangerous because you can fall asleep because of how weak it is. Beware.

trukn1

Have driven both, when I was car shopping a few months ago, and the CR-V has always had the more "strained" of the two powerplants. The Rav just felt alot more quicker, more nimble, and almost never gave the impression that it was struggling for more power to propel itself. CR-V on the other hand has always felt a bit underpowered, until you got it up to speed, and then it was comfortable but just gave the impression that a V6 SHOULD have been in this CUV all along. Honda just NEVER got the memo, that the CR-V NEEDS a V-6 to make it respectable. However with the core buyer market being soccer moms, and just people using the CUV to get groceries, power was just not a really big deal. The interior of the Honda was a bit more refined than the Rav, but the quietness in the RAV is almost insane. BOTH, seem to have well respected track records for reliablity. Aunt had a 97 CR-v, which she bought new, and it performed almost flawlessly, with no MAJOR problems with regular maintenance. Just traded it a few months ago for a newer one b/c she loved the CUV. Underpowered was always my impression; but once you got past that, not a bad ride at all. BOTH of your choices will find you some level of happiness, but for the whole shot,, I would gofor the RAV.

EthanV

I had a CRV awd 04 which has the 2.4. This thing is so slow. I test drove the new CRV, thought it would be better but I really dont feel any impress. Two of friends bought the 12 CRV and always complainted. I know they test drove it and bought them but having own them for several months they really not like it that much. I know when I said it slow then It's just a 4cyl and we dont expect much from it. Haven't driven any RAV4 at all but drove a Camry 05 of a friend 4cyl which the engine is smooth and very pick up when acceleration. I going to test drive the new RAV4 and make a decision!

spwolf

this was old 2.5l rav4 or v6? i am surprised that it is such difference...

GSteg

iTrader: (15)

If you have to get the CRV, then I would at least wait for the new Earth dream engine to be implemented. If the specs are anything like the Accord's I4, then it should accelerate noticeably better.

SteVTEC

The problem with Honda engines in general is that they always tune them for maximum possible power all the way up top at 7000 rpm. Who the heck is going to be winding out a CR-V to 7 grand?? And they do this at the expense of the torque curve in the 2000-4000rpm range where you're going to be driving at the vast majority of the time. But hey at least it looks great on paper to people who know nothing about engines. The approach of Toyota and just about everybody else on the planet is more appropriate. Tune more for a nice torque curve and accessible power, and don't make maximum possible peak horsepower as much of a priority.

I had a rental RAV4 once with the 2.5L and 4AT and aside from 2nd gear corner exits with the looooong gearing in that thing, I never felt it was slow or underpowered at all. Once up to speed it was quite impressive actually. The new 6-speed automatic will definitely resolve the slower speed issues.

Sulu

My wife has a 2013 Honda Accord with the new Earth Dreams 2.4-litre engine. I can say that it is MUCH smoother and quieter than the old 2.4-litre in the CR-V.

We test drove the CR-V first, and after reading reviews of the CR-V, I took particular attention of the engine. It did not seem too rough but it definitely was noisy when you stuck your foot into it. But then driving the Accord, I noticed how much smoother and quieter the Accord was compared to the CR-V.

UDel

The new CRV is still one of the quickest 4 cly CUV's in its class, it also is at the top in hp ratings. Nothing in its class now is particularly quick unless you step up to a Escape Titanium edition with the turbo 4 which is a hefty premium over the CRV..

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...n/viewall.html

SteVTEC

Hopefully it'll be pretty good at less than WOT and during normal driving.

This TOV dyno seems to show a pretty stout torque curve: http://www.vtec.net/articles/view-ar...cle_id=1109224