310 Views
2015 Honda CR-V Adopts CVT

by Derek Kreindler
(IC: employee)
July 23rd, 2014 10:27 AM
Share

The last word in functional, utilitarian crossovers will now move even further towards the middle of the road, as the Honda CR-V adopts a CVT for its mid-cycle refresh.
Replacing the outdated 5-speed automatic, the CVT gearbox is, by our own EIC’s admission, a fantastic transmission. Furthermore, nobody buying the CR-V will know the difference, or care enough about it. The bland, practical formula that Honda appears to have perfected has made the CR-V the top-selling crossover for years and years. Don’t expect that to change any time soon.
Published July 23rd, 2014 10:27 AM
Comments
Join the conversation
Much though we've enjoyed our two CR-Vs I've got to say that the occipital bun look to the current model's rear end annoys the hell out of me. We won't be getting rid of our '09 anytime soon. But now I'm curious to test drive a CVT version to see what all the hubbub is about.
I have a wish that the guy who writes those awesome transmission articles writes one about this or other CVT. I like to know what is the difference between good and bad CVT, what wear and maintenance items are, what could possibly break , how likely that is and how expensive that is. I think there are way too many fearmongerers who don't know CVT and just make up problems. I like to think after years of CVT use, Honda is comfortable using it for a reason.
2 years go my wife bought a 2012 CR-V. I supported the purchase at the time because it made her happier than her previous ride. (don't ask, I'll just start crying again). The CR-V is perfectly competent vehicle. It's reliable, safe enough in a crash, quiet enough on the highway at speed and gets very good mileage. And I absolutely hated it. A golf cart has better steering feel. The bluetooth handsfree system is absurdly out of date of a 2012 vehicle. (it doesn't use PBAP to properly read your contact list without pre-programmed voice prompts). The stereo was merely adequate and the seats are too wide, flat and firm. The body roll is 1990's Explorer throwback and the traction control in snow is terrible. And my number 1 beef with the CR-V, the visibility in the rear quarters is terrible. Not just terrible but borderline unsafe. A co-worker bought one last week and within the first day of ownership nearly ran someone out of the right lane due to the size of the blind spot. It's not just big enough to hide a car but the garage it's parked in as well. If manufacturers continue to sacrifice visibility at the altar of styling I see this as the next area of regulation by governmental safety bureaus. There should be a minimum cumulative degree of visibility from the drivers seat. If you can't see trouble you can't get yourself out of it either. So to solve this problem last Saturday we sold the I-Can't-See-RV and bought the 2015 Subaru Forester. Each one does some things better than the other. And yes the bluetooth system in the Subuaru is just as bad. But the visibility is the best I've seen in any vehicle in years. The Harmon-Kardon stereo sounds worlds better. I love the HUGH sunroof! It handles better, rides better, is quiet, reliable, gets good enough MPG. Yep it's got the CVT and I used to recall in horror of those. Honestly, it drives really well and most people couldn't tell the difference from a good AT. So far she loves it. And I feel better about her driving it.
CVT's are TERRIBLE, NO MECHANIC OR TRANS SHOP KNOW HOW, LET ALONE CAN'T FIX THEM. YOU HAVE TO BUY ANOTHER USED, OR MUST BUY NEW FROM THE FACTORY. VERY EXPENSIVE. I WILL NEVE OWN ONE. TERRIBLE AND ADMITTED FROM NISSAN - This was a cheap band-aid for their poor sales and worth/money they had at the time. They Admitted in Court they were knowing they don't last. So Why are all other Manufactures NOW USING THEM, AHHHH!