By on April 20, 2016

2018 Honda CR-V (3)

Spy photos of the next-generation Honda CR-V have just rolled in from rural Ohio.

The camo-clad vehicle can’t hide the extensively restyled body planned for the 2018 model year. Honda’s plan is to grow the size of the strong-selling crossover, while bringing the whole package upscale.

2018 Honda CR-V (9)

Most noticeable on this test mule are taillights that wrap around the lower edges of the rear window, reminiscent of newer Honda models like the HR-V.

Rumors abound of a seven-seat version of the CR-V, which would need an increase in length over its current dimensions to pull off. Unfortunately, this vehicle had its rearmost side windows covered, so there was no peak of a third row.

Honda will likely field a turbocharged four cylinder in the new CR-V, with rumors of a possible plug-in hybrid variant. The 2018 CR-V is expected to be available in the middle of 2017.

[Image: © 2016 Spiedbilde/The Truth About Cars]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

60 Comments on “2018 Honda CR-V Spied Testing in Ohio...”


  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    Yawwwwwwwwn.

  • avatar

    YAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWN

    Another facelift with another turbocharged 4-cylinder.

    It’ll be the perfect choice for the low-end appliance crossover

    • 0 avatar
      NormSV650

      Toyota is far behind in turbochargers for the masses.

      • 0 avatar

        No one wants turbocharging. More boost requires more fuel.

        If they’d simply put adequately SIZED ENGINES IN THEIR CARS, turbos would be unnecessary.

        A vehicle like this needs a small displacement v6 or a large displacement 4-cylinder or diesel.

        Making smaller and smaller displacement engines with turbos is just causing diminishing returns:

        • 0 avatar
          carguy

          @BTSR: You do realize that every diesel engine in today’s passenger vehicles and trucks are turbo charged?

          • 0 avatar

            Turbocharging a diesel spreads the torque and horsepower because typically, diesels have truncated power bands.

            Yes I do realize this.

            Thing is, in a small car, a regular diesel provides more power in the low end and more fuel economy at the cost of more expensive fuel – at least in America.

          • 0 avatar
            sportyaccordy

            BTSR…. turbos do the same things for gas motors. Just like the superchargers in your HELLCATS.

        • 0 avatar
          Rick Astley

          While acutely aware that nobody is allowed to have a differing opinion from yours lest they be bombarded with your keyboard of fury, I find myself with a differing opinion from you.

          A smaller displacement turbo-4 would achieve the torque that most people cant seem to figure out how to use anyway when accelerating to freeway speeds (usually after merging on the freeway at 10 mph below prevailing speed), yet cruise with better em-pee-gees than a larger displacement 4. In theory, it is what the people will want when conducting a serious test drive of one 2-mile business loop of choice by the salesperson.

          And Honda has a colorful history with their transmission reliability when mated to v6’s. I would steer clear of any V6 until the last generation/model year.

          Therefore, if I was shopping for a CR-V (which i’m not), the turbo 4 would be my engine of choice.

          Full disclosure to make you happy: I have a 200,000+ mile 4wd civic wagon with 87 whp 1.6 4 cylinder. Oh, and a ’63 Thunderbird with a built FE390 for weekends.

        • 0 avatar
          fvfvsix

          I would much prefer a CR-V with a 2.0t rather than the current 2.4l 4-cylinder. As evidenced by the Civic’s increase in usable performance with the 1.5t, I think a bit more oomph under 5K RPM is just what the CR-V needs.

          • 0 avatar
            V4Rider

            This. I have an 08 Element with the same powertrain as most CR-V’s still on the road today (K24A8 and 5AT) I hate the fact that I need 4000 rpm to get any sort of urgency out of it. The engine’s smooth enough but it sounds like a rock tumbler gargling nails, and takes forever to get into the powerband, (typical of all Elements). I’m perfectly happy spinning my VFR like a skitzophrenic hamster on a wheel but man if I could have more torque, less noise and lower RPM in my daily, that’d be great. N/A motors do not suit that type of vehicle whatsoever,

        • 0 avatar
          APaGttH

          …No one wants turbocharging…

          Ya, no one wants it. That’s why BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, Audi, Lincoln, Cadillac, and Jaguar all offer turbocharged vehicles.

          • 0 avatar
            sgeffe

            It’s the constant need, or wish, of the automakers to prostrate themselves at the altar of “green” driving turdos. “Gaming” CAFE at the expense of real-world usability and increased maintenance costs for the consumer.

            The automotive equivalent of “teaching to the test.”

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Precisely. Nobody does want it, it is being reframed as something “new”, “good”, or “high tech”. You have no choice in the matter, they build what they want and talk you into why you’re buying it.

          • 0 avatar
            stuki

            Noone sane wants turbocharging :)

        • 0 avatar
          bd2

          Even Toyota is belated turning to turbocharging.

          Instead of straight EVs or even PHEVs, we’ll probably see ICE continue to dominate with electric turbos assisted by electric motors (such as an e-AWD system).

          • 0 avatar
            sgeffe

            They are getting rid of the V6 in the highest Camry trims. Honda is turdocharging the low-end Accord trims; fortunately, the “big kahuna” for the Temple Of VTEC (VTEC.com) recently asked a Honda bigwig about the status of the J35 V6 in the Accord for the 10th-Gen, and the feedback was positive.

            If Honda can do a hybrid Accord with a battery pack that allows most of the trunk space of a non-hybrid vehicle (including fold-down seats), I’d be all over it! (Of course, it’d have to do 0-80 in the identical time to the V6, if not faster!) At this point, my guess is that they can’t quite yet, so gimme MAD V6 VTEC POWAH until then!

          • 0 avatar
            Chocolatedeath

            Havent read anywhere that Toyota has decided on getting rid of its V6 yet. Just still thinking about it.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            It’s coming. My guess is that 2016 is the last model-year of the V6 Camry.

            It makes no sense to charge >$32K for a V6 Camry when you can buy a V6 Avalon for roughly the same amount of money with more room and higher quality trim.

            My best friend bought a 2015 Avalon for less than $30K, plus tt&l. It’s like a Camry on steroids. Really nice!

  • avatar
    Invisible

    Looks like the CR-V is going to continue to dominate the segment.

    • 0 avatar
      NormSV650

      The Theta twins do so in sales, Equinox and Terrain.

      • 0 avatar
        Kyree S. Williams

        I don’t know why. The Equinox and Terrain suck. The only thing they have going for them is an abundance of rear legroom versus competitors, but they are otherwise plasticky, poorly-styled…and at the bottom of my list whenever I talk people through compact crossovers they should by.

      • 0 avatar
        FromaBuick6

        Wow. The Thetas outsold the the CR-V by a whopping 45k units in 2015. Very dominating. Never mind the fact that this required two unique body styles, two separate marketing campaigns and about 5x as many dealers for GM to pull this off. And that’s not accounting the probably 25%+ fleet sales, compared to the CR-V’s statistically insignificant fleet percentage…

        On the other hand, I’m impressed that GM does this well with the Thetas when they’ve been unchanged since 2009.

  • avatar
    SC5door

    The rear gate is a bit like the Tucson. Not a fan of the milk jug mufflers in the back, hopefully there’s a rear valance piece missing on this PP vehicle that would cover it.

  • avatar
    Kyree S. Williams

    I just showed this to my coworker, who has a 2015 CR-V EX. He likes what he can see of it, which is a good thing. The CR-V has a lot of repeat buyers. Honda did a really good job facelifting the CR-V for 2015, but hopefully some of the new Civic’s upscale features and driving-feel make their way to the redesigned CR-V.

    • 0 avatar
      sgeffe

      The CVT isn’t as good as the one in the Accord — nice enough, but a bit too much “rubber-band” effects. Just a software tweak away from nailing it, and unlike the Accord, I don’t believe they’re having to replace them in droves, so that’s a good sign!

  • avatar

    Any rumours about a hybrid? It seems like Honda has finally gotten the hybrid recipe right, why not pull a RAV4 and sell a hybrid version as well? It’s certainly worked well for Toyota’s otherwise completely unimpressive CUV.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    Saw a current gen CR-V parked yesterday and notice an odd seam in the liftgate.

    Does the current CR-V have a two-piece liftgate with a mini tailgate? That is how it looked.

  • avatar
    Superdessucke

    Any chance for a 6-speed manual?

    • 0 avatar
      sportyaccordy

      Why? The chassis will still be completely inert. A manual will not make this thing fun to drive.

      • 0 avatar
        Zykotec

        A manual usually makes everything less horrible to drive, if not exactly fun.

        • 0 avatar
          sportyaccordy

          There is about a $Texas$ wide gap between less horrible and fun. Nobody would choose this in stickshift over a Civic hatch.

          • 0 avatar
            stuki

            People in areas snowy enough to prefer some added ground clearance… The manual Forrester has a decent take rate, despite Subie’s manuals being about 55 orders of magnitude less tactile than Honda’s. Ditto for manual Tacos. And even Cummins Rams, hardly the most agile of vehicles.

          • 0 avatar
            gtemnykh

            Added bonus of a manual in an AWD vehicle that presumably will see snow, especially when the other transmission choice is a CVT, is that there is less risk of overheating and damaging the transmission when rocking it out of a snow bank.

  • avatar
    FromaBuick6

    Not a lot of camo for a vehicle that won’t debut for a year. Especially for Honda, who seems to drag out their reveals longer than any other automatic. Looks they recycled the same ugly stick they beat the current model with.

    • 0 avatar
      Dave M.

      I like the CR-Vs style – kind of “euro” from the back. Can’t beat that luggage space….

      • 0 avatar
        sgeffe

        Had one as a dealer loaner while my Accord was in getting her biennial detail a year ago, and was taken with the cargo room.

        The MPGs were a bit low for my taste, and I already mentioned the CVT up-thread. Take care of those issues, and bring the overall refinement to Accord/Pilot-level, and I might consider it next time around.

  • avatar
    bd2

    As previously reported, seems like the next CR-V has indeed been “Sorento-sized.”

  • avatar
    theonewhogotaway

    Currently driving a 2015 CR-V LX (push button ignition in the higher trims was a no-go for me.) This looks about the same size, if anything judging from the size of the back doors, might be even a tad shorter. There is no way that they could pull of a third row there. Double muffler looks like something different is going on under the hood.

    About the 2.4 engine and the CVT: My CR-V replaced a 1995.5 XJ Cherokee with the 4.0 straight 6 (and close to 350K miles). Different cars, but the CR-V is much faster than the Cherokee and handles miles better. In the stripped down LX trim, 0-60 is close to mid 7 seconds, faster than the Cherokee, and 24 mph commuting / 31 highway, compared to 17/21 with the Jeep, is significant. Cannot see anyone needing more oomph in this car for the use of this car. It is not a towing/snow plowing machine, but it is an AWD wagon on stilts…

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    Another thing which struck me while on the road earlier, since the Civic is nearly the size of the Accord now, naturally CR-V will match.

  • avatar
    Chris

    It seems odd to think it will be a 2018 model. We are almost-mid 2016 without any hints of a 2017 model.

    I went to my local dealership last week and the seller told me he was told that the 2017 model would be completely different. If it’s the case, I don’t think Honda will sell 2016 models until mid-2017, so I hope this model is coming in the automn as a 2017.

  • avatar
    lot9

    Having driven different Honda autos and Suvs….I would not buy one of the new ones, today. Their tranny are not ready for prime time. Just look at the lawsuits filed.

    My CR-v is very hard noisy plasticity interior. Main features is all the road noise that one gets as you go down the road, sorta like riding a motorcycle as the wind whistles past your ears.

    Lot of other makes and models that have left Honda in the dust.

    One of my kids are in market for a new auto and they have Crossed Honda off their list of ones to buy. Honda needs to find its mojo, again.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Fordson: Some makes just should never produce SUVs…this is one of them. Look at the Maserati car in the group...
  • FreedMike: Toyota. Why do you think they haven’t invested in EVs?
  • redapple: Who will buy Tesla? GGM?
  • forward_look: Once I bought a ’74 (?) Colt/Mitsubishi for $100 that had the strut towers rusted out. I welded...
  • thelaine: Tick tock

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States