So I got to ride in a Civic yesterday

[Intrepidation]

My coworker drives a Civic sedan (he got it instead of the coupe for practicality reasons). Yesterday I road with him so he could show me an apartment complex that was rather confusing to figure out...I'm sure I'll get lost the first time I deliver there. But I digress.

The car is very roomy inside with top-notch interior materials that include a soft-touch upper dash, soft touch upper door panels, and fabric padded armrests on the center one and the doors. The hard plastics were well textures and pleasing to touch. I didn't mess with the switchgear but it all looked very easy to use. The design itself is really cool. the speedo is huge and easy to read the numbers, and the tach looks very cool and is also easy to read. The steering wheel is tiny and thick...plus it looks cool, and the shifter and small hand brake are highly stylized and very original. The car's engine very responsive and quiet and the transmission shifts smoothly and without delay. It also road very well over the lousy streets of Lawrence with no crashing sensations over the big stuff. It also had a very tight turning radius. I have to say that based on my impressions of that car it's easy to see why its class-leading and why so many people buy them.

GM, Ford, Toyota and Chrysler have a fair amount of catching up to do.

Edited May 26, 2007 by Dodgefan

[Satty]

Only bad thing I can say about the current Civic is that the DX (base model, starting at around $15k) doesn't have a radio or air conditioning standard. It has ABS and a spoiler, but no AC.

[pow]

Only bad thing I can say about the current Civic is that the DX (base model, starting at around $15k) doesn't have a radio or air conditioning standard. It has ABS and a spoiler, but no AC.

It has curtain and side airbags, too. The DX is only there to lower the starting MSRP.

[Flybrian]

It has curtain and side airbags, too. The DX is only there to lower the starting MSRP.

The DX is there so Honda dealers can bait-and-switch people onto the lots with a ridiculously low MSRP/lease offer and bump them up to a realistically-equipped car for more $$$.

The steering wheel is too small (I'm driving, not playing OutRun) and nothing beats a real HUD instead of the phony HUD-esque digital speedo readout. Otherwise, a decent compact if you really need a compact. Too bad the far inferior Corolla outsells it.

[Intrepidation]

The DX is there so Honda dealers can bait-and-switch people onto the lots with a ridiculously low MSRP/lease offer and bump them up to a realistically-equipped car for more $$$.

The steering wheel is too small (I'm driving, not playing OutRun) and nothing beats a real HUD instead of the phony HUD-esque digital speedo readout. Otherwise, a decent compact if you really need a compact. Too bad the far inferior Corolla outsells it.

I like small steering wheels better than than huge ones, it's all in the preference I guess The instrument cluster is funky but I like it for that reason...it's different.

[balthazar]

Not that they're the same vehicle, but I was in a last gen cr-v last fall and the interior was mediocre junk; 3 different colors & plastic textures, strange ergonomics, merely decent fit-n-finish. Either honda has improved their interiors markedly or the cr-v was designed with a very different set of parameters.

Edited April 22, 2007 by balthazar

[CARBIZ]

Toyota is getting a little more aggressive in flogging the Corolla these days; whereas, the Honda dealers are getting a little high on themselves. I would agree that the Civic is a great little car. It's styling is perhaps a little too "out there" for a lot of the older crowd who have been loyal to them. Personally, I like it.

But under the category of "Twenty Dollar a Monthing Yourself to Death." the Mazda 3 would be at least as good a vehicle, and for the money the Cobalt is better still. It is too bad that GM got caught cutting a few corners with the interior of the Cobalt (again), but otherwise it is a great car. So, the Cobalt is now nearly $2 grand cheaper than a Civic (in this market), which is nothing to sneeze at. For the same reason, Chrysler is scaring some of their hardcore (older) customers with the Calibre.

I'd rather they spent $500 more on the interior (particularly those awful cloth seats - rip them out of last year Optra, if you have to!) and then perhaps we wouldn't have to be on the defensive so much.

[Drew Dowdell]

have they cut the road and engine noise down to a level where the radio is usable?

[scotthendersonfan]

Only bad thing I can say about the current Civic is that the DX (base model, starting at around $15k) doesn't have a radio or air conditioning standard. It has ABS and a spoiler, but no AC.

The DX is a BS model. I don't even know why Honda sells it.

I'm not too thrilled with the new Civic's (my friend owns one) interior. There are many bits and pieces that I found that were a lot cheaper than the last generation Civic.

However, I was extremely impressed with the car's chassis rigidity. You'll notice it every single time you step into that car from another car. The chassis just feels extremely solid and stiff over bumps and undulations. The result is almost zero creaking, squeaking, noises etc. (drives me nuts). Also, the doors close in a very secure and cushioned fashion.

Overall, a very impressive car for the class that it is in.

[enzl]

Cobalt was simply a generation behind upon intro.

Class lagging safety features, 4 sp. auto, mediocre space utilization & mileage and a lack of ind rear suspension tells all you need to know about GM's intentions.

The Civic is clearly not for everyone, but its a nice product for most.

[Flybrian]

However, I was extremely impressed with the car's chassis rigidity. You'll notice it every single time you step into that car from another car. The chassis just feels extremely solid and stiff over bumps and undulations. The result is almost zero creaking, squeaking, noises etc. (drives me nuts). Also, the doors close in a very secure and cushioned fashion.

Again, the number one reason why I'm baffled at the Corolla's continued sales figures. Forget plastics, power, styling, even equipment and look at it only from the above standpoint. The Civic is a car that doesn't feel like its going to shake apart or tip over during regular driving. Even the last Civic was more structurally-sound than most compacts on the market and the current one is a marked improvement over it.

[Northstar]

New CRV interior is best in class.

:rotflmao:

Because it has a navigation system and some generic gauges? That's without a doubt the most bias statement I've heard in a while. The CRV's interior is a piece of junk. Hard, hollow plastic everywhere, noisy, and cramped. RAV4, Santa Fe, and basically all other compact SUVs/X-Over I rode in while shopping for one with my aunt were superior. The CRV was close to worst in class.

[Drew Dowdell]

OMG TEH RADIO ISN"T INTEGRATED INTO THE CENTER STACK! MORE GM CRAPPOLA BUILD QUALITY! GM IS THE SUXORS!

oh... it's a honda?

Never mind.

[turbo200]

:rotflmao:

Because it has a navigation system and some generic gauges? That's without a doubt the most bias statement I've heard in a while. The CRV's interior is a piece of junk. Hard, hollow plastic everywhere, noisy, and cramped. RAV4, Santa Fe, and basically all other compact SUVs/X-Over I rode in while shopping for one with my aunt were superior. The CRV was close to worst in class.

Because you are usually very reasonable and logical I will withhold from using the word I thought of when I saw the post that followed yours.

He posted pictures in support of his argument, no more no less. They were not alone meant to prove the quality of the inteiror, his opinion was the evidence for that. However, those gauges may be generic but they are highly highly detailed and the information center that resides in between them is also expensive looking.

CR-V's interior, the current generation, the one that just debuted, is in a class all its own. It is far superior to cars costing 10k more, like the Edge, the Lambdas, the Silverado, the GMT 900s excluding Escalade. The consistency of materials, the textures, the fluidity with which each control stalk and button operates all speak to a higher standard of build. The leather is amazing.

the last generation CR-V was released in 2002. Perhaps that's why held up against today's standards it is subpar. But in 2002, it was pretty good.

[Flybrian]

Too bad Honda didn't apply the same design thoroughness to the exterior.

[turbo200]

Too bad Honda didn't apply the same design thoroughness to the exterior.

I disagree, if you are implying it doesn't look sophisticated. If you are implying it doesn't look good, then I'd have to agree with you because it just isn't for me. For a young mom though, it might be the right look.

[frogger]

After the initial WTH is that reaction I had to the Civic, its styling has grown on me quite a bit. Now I think other cars in its class look too dated, boring or conservative in comparison.

[Drew Dowdell]

Because you are usually very reasonable and logical I will withhold from using the word I thought of when I saw the post that followed yours.

He posted pictures in support of his argument, no more no less. They were not alone meant to prove the quality of the inteiror, his opinion was the evidence for that. However, those gauges may be generic but they are highly highly detailed and the information center that resides in between them is also expensive looking.

CR-V's interior, the current generation, the one that just debuted, is in a class all its own. It is far superior to cars costing 10k more, like the Edge, the Lambdas, the Silverado, the GMT 900s excluding Escalade. The consistency of materials, the textures, the fluidity with which each control stalk and button operates all speak to a higher standard of build. The leather is amazing.

the last generation CR-V was released in 2002. Perhaps that's why held up against today's standards it is subpar. But in 2002, it was pretty good.

You've gotta be kidding me. There are 8 shades of gray in that thing!

and you're saying it is "clearly" superior to these?

I don't think it's "clearly" superior to any of these. Sure the turn signal lever might have a nicer feel to it... but come on. What are you smoking and do you intend to share?

Edited April 22, 2007 by Oldsmoboi

[Northstar]

Because you are usually very reasonable and logical I will withhold from using the word I thought of when I saw the post that followed yours.

He posted pictures in support of his argument, no more no less. They were not alone meant to prove the quality of the inteiror, his opinion was the evidence for that. However, those gauges may be generic but they are highly highly detailed and the information center that resides in between them is also expensive looking.

CR-V's interior, the current generation, the one that just debuted, is in a class all its own. It is far superior to cars costing 10k more, like the Edge, the Lambdas, the Silverado, the GMT 900s excluding Escalade. The consistency of materials, the textures, the fluidity with which each control stalk and button operates all speak to a higher standard of build. The leather is amazing.

the last generation CR-V was released in 2002. Perhaps that's why held up against today's standards it is subpar. But in 2002, it was pretty good.

I was being sarcastic about the gauges and nav unit making a nicer interior, but I was being serious in the rest. Guess I should have used a smiley to make that more clear.

As for the CRV, I rode in the current one, not the old one, back to back with the current RAV4, and felt, from a passenger's point of view, that the RAV4 was nicer, as well as the Santa Fe and others.

Your statement that the CRV’s interior is nicer than the Lambdas and T900s is ridiculous. It may be equal to the Edge's, but I felt that sucked for the most part, too. There was one part of the interior that I thought was nice, and it was the upper part of the door armrest, the rest sucked. The dash sounded hollow when tapped, the plastics were rough and hard, and it was impossible to find a comfortable seating position. The only consistency I found was that most of the materials were consistently bad.

I just posted some random pics. After reading your post, it's 100% clear to me that you haven't checked out the new CRV. It walks all over the competition (especially the RAV4 which has a very cheap interior in comparison).

The plastics are absolutely superb with excellent graining, texture and feel. The material quality is very high and the knobs, dials, stalks and other control surfaces are all very precise with no play. With the exception of the no-6 cylinder option, this is truely a superior product.

Once again, don't just go off of internet photos. They only tell half the story (the design part). You'll be surprised how high quality the new CRV's interior is and the competition has a lot of catching up to do.

This is the only large photo I could find (it's the same as the US interior except right handed)

As I said previously, your opinion has to be the most bias thing I have read in a long time. I did not drive the CRV, but I rode in the passenger seat. Therefore, I cannot comment on the stalks, dials, etc., which may very well be very nice and precise, but the materials, aside from the upper part of the door armrests, sucked (see above).

The design is nice, but the majority of the materials certainly are not.

Also, I sat in a $29k model, so it's not as if it had nothing on it.

[Flybrian]

I disagree, if you are implying it doesn't look sophisticated. If you are implying it doesn't look good, then I'd have to agree with you because it just isn't for me. For a young mom though, it might be the right look.

It just doesn't look good and while certain elements of sophistication exist, the overall styling theme is head-scratching. Like art, for me to appreciate a design as being sophisticated, I have to first know what the hell it is.

[Drew Dowdell]

Even the Torrent is at least on par with the CRV

[scotthendersonfan]

I'm sorry, the Edge's interior is nowhere even close to the CRV's interior. It looks ok in photos but in person, it is the same old Ford - cheap, cheap, cheap.

Compare The Edge's interior to Ford's own Mazda CX9's interior. You may not percieve the difference in quality in these pictures, but I assure you, in person, there's a major difference in the feel of both interiors. The CRV is the same, it is a very quality interior compared to its competition. However, I have still not been in any of the Lambdas but the Acadia and Enclave interior look first rate.

[scotthendersonfan]

Even the Torrent is at least on par with the CRV

You're confusing design with quality. GM in the past had issues with both. Then their designs started falling in line and now finally, their quality is coming close to the competition.

[ocnblu]

Turbo, I live with a GMT900 Sierra every day, and I can attest to the fact everything fits, operates and feels first-rate to me. You're wrong.

[Northstar]

I'm sorry, the Edge's interior is nowhere even close to the CRV's interior. It looks ok in photos but in person, it is the same old Ford - cheap, cheap, cheap.

Compare The Edge's interior to Ford's own Mazda CX9's interior. You may not percieve the difference in quality in these pictures, but I assure you, in person, there's a major difference in the feel of both interiors. The CRV is the same, it is a very quality interior compared to its competition. However, I have still not been in any of the Lambdas but the Acadia and Enclave interior look first rate.

Again, not going by switchgear quality and such, I felt the Edge's was comparable to the CRV's, both being pretty poor (I am talking door panels, dashes, other materials. Not switchgear and such; I'm sure the CRV's is better, but I didn't try it out.

Really, there is not much of anything in the compact class with a good interior, but I did feel others were slightly better than the CRV. The CRV's is certainly not worth $30k when it's loaded up. Maybe $20k for a base model is reasonable, but there are much better options for $30k, I feel.

And just FYI, my aunt loves/loved Hondas, and really thought she wanted a CRV when we went looking, but she was totally unimpressed with it, just as I was. She thought everything was rather cheap (again, I don't know what she thought of the switchgear, but she complained about the materials).

[Intrepidation]

I don't see what's wrong with the Edge's interior. Of course it's not as stylized and adventurous as the Mazda's...but that's how Mazda and Ford are. Ford is more conservative with its designs. Both look nice to me.

On another note, teh CRV doesn't hold a candle to the interiors in the Lambdas...also I agree with everything Fly said about the exterior.

[balthazar]

those gauges may be generic but they are highly highly detailed and the information center that resides in between them is also expensive looking.

Here's how they're not:

> 'range' number is flush right, 'mpg' number is NOT flush left.

> room for 'average' but only reads 'avg.'

> linespacing for both is VERY tight.

> what is "14.2" readout indicating? What is that tiny floating "A" indicating? no units shown.

> "69 F" would look far better centered than offset toward the left.

I could go on & on. Functional after getting used to it I suppose, but presentation, clarity and intuitivity are very very low. Graphically, the presentation would grade a C at best.

[Northstar]

I don't see what's wrong with the Edge's interior. Of course it's not as stylized and adventurous as the Mazda's...but that's how Mazda and Ford are. Ford is more conservative with its designs. Both look nice to me.

On another note, teh CRV doesn't hold a candle to the interiors in the Lambdas...also I agree with everything Fly said about the exterior.

The CX-9 is very close to on par with the Lambdas or possibly on par with them. The biggest difference has to be the door panels for me. The Mazda uses some sort of leather/leatherette type material while, as you can see, the Edge has a big chunk of (relatively hard) plastic. Other than that there isn't a whole lot of difference, though I think the CX-9 had better dashtop material as well, but the door panels made the CX-9 feel like a much more expensive vehicle. It probably made if feel like it was $5k more expensive, but it probably only cost what, $300 a car to make the door panels better.

[Intrepidation]

I find this to be fa more useful and function...and since there's a NAV in the cluster, it looks far more expensive.

But if you wanna talk about expensive and sophisticated, please....the CR-V is nothing.

Now this, is expensive and sophisticated

I know, not a fair comparison by any means, just an excuse to show off these beauties.

[AxelTheRed]

When I think Honda, I think dishwashers.

I want a car with a little character, not a mobile appliance.

I'll stick to GM, Ford and Chrysler.

[Variance]

When I think Honda, I think dishwashers.

I want a car with a little character, not a mobile appliance.

I'll stick to GM, Ford and Chrysler.

Geez...

You could have at least have alluded to an appliance they actually make, like lawnmowers.

[AxelTheRed]

Geez...

You could have at least have alluded to an appliance they actually make, like lawnmowers.

I guess so, but they put me on dishwashing duty at work today, so I guess that's stuck in my head.

[Ravenfreak13]

I love the pacificas use of nav in the gauges.

[big blue]

Now this, is expensive and sophisticated

I know, not a fair comparison by any means, just an excuse to show off these beauties.

*bows down to the awesomeness of the Aston Martin gauges*

[CARBIZ]

Wow, this thread got seriously hijacked from Civic to CR-V. And Enzl, PTHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! I will agree the Cobalt could have gone a little farther than it did, but with 3 engine choices, 4 wheel choices, 5 models, availability of options (On Star, side airbags) at all price levels, usuable features (standard auto headlights, power trunk release!), the torque curve, quiet steel........well, I could go on. But instead of an intelligent discussion, let's get bogged down on 4 spd trannies and hard plastics. oH, Y EAH, and the PRICE.

OH MY GOD!

[pow]

The Astra, not the Cobalt, is GM's competitor to "the Civic, Rabbit, and Mazda3", or so says the online Saturn rep. The Cobalt targets the Spectra, Caliber, Corolla, Lancer, Forenza, Elantra, Focus, and other second-tier compacts.

[Intrepidation]

That's strange since the Caliber isn't a sedan or coupe.

[enzl]

Wow, this thread got seriously hijacked from Civic to CR-V. And Enzl, PTHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! I will agree the Cobalt could have gone a little farther than it did, but with 3 engine choices, 4 wheel choices, 5 models, availability of options (On Star, side airbags) at all price levels, usuable features (standard auto headlights, power trunk release!), the torque curve, quiet steel........well, I could go on. But instead of an intelligent discussion, let's get bogged down on 4 spd trannies and hard plastics. oH, Y EAH, and the PRICE.

OH MY GOD!

We sell 'em (plenty, BTW) and they're not class leading, & not a person on this board could/would argue it!

The Lambda's are well thought out and, arguably, class leading. The GMT's leave little doubt as to their quality. Why shouldn't I demand the same of Chevy's small cars? Selling on price is a recipe for disaster that leaves your showroom full of mediocre product at a 'good' price. Leave that market to the Koreans, GM.

[Intrepidation]

The Cobalt among other compacts should offer a 5 or 6 speed automatic, at least as an option on top trim levels. How hard is it to do that? The Malibu will get that as an option. Then Cobalt would have a class-leading powertrain, and no doubt better fuel economy. Same goes for the Caliber...make a 6-speed an option...instead of that crappy CVT.

[sciguy_0504]

After the initial WTH is that reaction I had to the Civic, its styling has grown on me quite a bit. Now I think other cars in its class look too dated, boring or conservative in comparison.

I've grown to like the new Civic, too, but only the coupe. It's stylish and elegant. The sedan is frumpy and geeky, and its flat ass is horrible.

[turbo200]

Here's how they're not:

> 'range' number is flush right, 'mpg' number is NOT flush left.

> room for 'average' but only reads 'avg.'

> linespacing for both is VERY tight.

> what is "14.2" readout indicating? What is that tiny floating "A" indicating? no units shown.

> "69 F" would look far better centered than offset toward the left.

I could go on & on. Functional after getting used to it I suppose, but presentation, clarity and intuitivity are very very low. Graphically, the presentation would grade a C at best.

of course, what more could i expect from a board full of GM jockeys? impartialty? just about every response against me sounds as unsubstansive and meaningless as this. Claiming I'm wrong, when you're only evidence is you live with one daily, right, just another example of a "strong argument".

I give credence to Northie, since he has said he has actually driven and spent time in the CR-V. Nothing you say above, balthazar really disproves my point that the gauges are detailed and expensive looking.

Other than Northstar, no one here has argued my points with real solid testimony. I have sat in all the cars I talked about, and I was certainly not referring to Enclave since that one is not out yet and can't be tested in that way. I have sat in the Edge, CR-V, Acadia, Outlook, Tahoe, Silverado, etc. While the GMT 900s come closest, and definitely they all represent significant quality jumps for thier respective automakers and can claim to be the best from thier respective company, that is not enough still. The CR-V has a consistency of quality throughout. From the incredible fit, to the incredible roofliner, to the incredible switches for the sunroof even, to the incredibly tight fits, to the nice radio design, to the soft and taut leather, to the door panels and dashboard panels. About the only plastics that I can say are not as good as the rest, are the hard black shell encasing the stereo, which NO ONE makes any other way than as a hard plastic, and the silver plastic that runs across the dash just directly above the radio, which I can't totally remember but I think is not that nice. The steering wheel feels incredible; everything, I mean this is a Honda, and Honda makes Acura, and if you have fiddled with any new Acura, you know they have next to some of the nicest interiors in the world. It makes sense that the disciplined and proud company that is Honda, would spread that attribute to its own namesake. I can't say why Northie's experience was not the same. I don't know. But I can say, from my own experience the [uplevel] Silverado may have a more luxurious looking interior, but the consistency of the materials is not like that in the CR-V. On a whole the uplevel Silverado interior and the similar Tahoes, Subs, etc are very luxurious and have some very nice materials, but their are many materials in there that are questionable, especially when compared to cars like the Civic and CR-V, that for thier price especially, seem to get almost every material right.

[Intrepidation]

of course, what more could i expect from a board full of GM jockeys? impartialty? just about every response against me sounds as unsubstansive and meaningless as this. Claiming I'm wrong, when you're only evidence is you live with one daily, right, just another example of a "strong argument".

I give credence to Northie, since he has said he has actually driven and spent time in the CR-V. Nothing you say above, balthazar really disproves my point that the gauges are detailed and expensive looking.

Other than Northstar, no one here has argued my points with real solid testimony. I have sat in all the cars I talked about, and I was certainly not referring to Enclave since that one is not out yet and can't be tested in that way. I have sat in the Edge, CR-V, Acadia, Outlook, Tahoe, Silverado, etc. While the GMT 900s come closest, and definitely they all represent significant quality jumps for thier respective automakers and can claim to be the best from thier respective company, that is not enough still. The CR-V has a consistency of quality throughout. From the incredible fit, to the incredible roofliner, to the incredible switches for the sunroof even, to the incredibly tight fits, to the nice radio design, to the soft and taut leather, to the door panels and dashboard panels. About the only plastics that I can say are not as good as the rest, are the hard black shell encasing the stereo, which NO ONE makes any other way than as a hard plastic, and the silver plastic that runs across the dash just directly above the radio, which I can't totally remember but I think is not that nice. The steering wheel feels incredible; everything, I mean this is a Honda, and Honda makes Acura, and if you have fiddled with any new Acura, you know they have next to some of the nicest interiors in the world. It makes sense that the disciplined and proud company that is Honda, would spread that attribute to its own namesake. I can't say why Northie's experience was not the same. I don't know. But I can say, from my own experience the [uplevel] Silverado may have a more luxurious looking interior, but the consistency of the materials is not like that in the CR-V. On a whole the uplevel Silverado interior and the similar Tahoes, Subs, etc are very luxurious and have some very nice materials, but their are many materials in there that are questionable, especially when compared to cars like the Civic and CR-V, that for thier price especially, seem to get almost every material right.

Not that I'm disagreeing (I haven't sat in one yet)...but uh...what's with the repeated use of "incredible" I mean seriously...the headliner?

I still don't buy into the whole "gauges are expensive" bit. Because most cars today have pretty chrome rings and dials. It's plastic too. Big deal. The lighting is nice but you can find that in a lot of cars...ditto for the info center. The rest of the interior is probably very good, but I can't say until I sit in one. Design wise it's top-notch though.

[turbo200]

Not that I'm disagreeing (I haven't sat in one yet)...but uh...what's with the repeated use of "incredible" I mean seriously...the headliner?

I still don't buy into the whole "gauges are expensive" bit. Because most cars today have pretty chrome rings and dials. It's plastic too. Big deal. The lighting is nice but you can find that in a lot of cars...ditto for the info center. The rest of the interior is probably very good, but I can't say until I sit in one. Design wise it's top-notch though.

the word "incredible", I use it for effect, for emphasis on how strongly i feel about those; the things i mentioned though, they really are pretty nice. the gauges, to me, look professional, something aobut the font used, something about the colors, the whole combo looks real classy and nice. I can think of several domestic cars, even some high end, that fail to meet that level.

[Drew Dowdell]

the word "incredible", I use it for effect, for emphasis on how strongly i feel about those; the things i mentioned though, they really are pretty nice. the gauges, to me, look professional, something about the font used, something about the colors, the whole combo looks real classy and nice. I can think of several domestic cars, even some high end, that fail to meet my personal tastes

[turbo200]

You've gotta be kidding me. There are 8 shades of gray in that thing!

and you're saying it is "clearly" superior to these?

I don't think it's "clearly" superior to any of these. Sure the turn signal lever might have a nicer feel to it... but come on. What are you smoking and do you intend to share?

it's not the look, or the color choice that I'm comparing. I first sat in the CR-V a month before its official debut, since then I've sat in it once more. Each time I was in it, I was thorough in touching every single material. They got everything right. I had not one single thing I could complain about. In a 25k SUV, that is what impressed me the most. Edited April 23, 2007 by turbo200

[Sixty8panther]

I still prefer the Cobalt SS/SC to any Honda Civic.

The Cobalt is a better value, better styling inside

& out and to top it all off it's cams are not driven

by an oversized rubber band.

I hate Honda. The more I look at them, the more

I see them in junkyards with their cheap crappy

motors & flimsy chassis and the more I see them

post accident looking like a squished grape I

vow never to buy one.

Dodgefan: So was the 80 mile round trip to Balicky's

Junkyard in my B-59 better or worse than your

experience in the Civic?

[Cadillacfan]

Because you are usually very reasonable and logical I will withhold from using the word I thought of when I saw the post that followed yours.

He posted pictures in support of his argument, no more no less. They were not alone meant to prove the quality of the inteiror, his opinion was the evidence for that. However, those gauges may be generic but they are highly highly detailed and the information center that resides in between them is also expensive looking.

CR-V's interior, the current generation, the one that just debuted, is in a class all its own. It is far superior to cars costing 10k more, like the Edge, the Lambdas, the Silverado, the GMT 900s excluding Escalade. The consistency of materials, the textures, the fluidity with which each control stalk and button operates all speak to a higher standard of build. The leather is amazing.

The Edge maybe, I don't know exactly since I've never sat in one, but not the GMT900s and certainly not the Lambdas. Unless you've sat in each GM SUV including the Enclave which isn't even out yet, I doubt the CR-V interior is better. Best in class? Absolutely, but not best out there in the entire SUV field. I've sat in all of the GMT900s including the Escalade and sat in the Saturn Outlook at a recent autoshow and was very impressed. The Edge just looks cheap.. even if it isn't. It's the CTS-effect.

the last generation CR-V was released in 2002. Perhaps that's why held up against today's standards it is subpar. But in 2002, it was pretty good.

Again, I have to disagree with you. A friend of mine has a 2003 CR-V. Not the best quality interior and certainly drab looking. Can't say I like the placement of the radio nor the quality of the HVAC/Radio buttons.

Best non- Land Rover & Mercedes SUV interior from 2002-2005 would have to be the Lexus RX-330 hands down. I've been in one quite a few times and it was easily the best looking and highest quality.

Land Rover and Mercedes are excluded since they're in a class all their own.

Edited April 23, 2007 by Cadillacfan

[Drew Dowdell]

it's not the look, or the color choice that I'm comparing. I first sat in the CR-V a month before its official debut, since then I've sat in it once more. Each time I was in it, I was thorough in touching every single material. They got everything right. I had not one single thing I could complain about. In a 25k SUV, that is what impressed me the most.

Just make sure the lid on your Kool-Aid is on tight when you're trying them out.

[GXT]

Again, I have to disagree with you. A friend of mine has a 2003 CR-V. Not the best quality interior and certainly drab looking. Can't say I like the placement of the radio nor the quality of the HVAC/Radio buttons.

Honda experienced a marked improvement in interior quality in NA with the current gen Accord. Everything after it has had similar improvements. The Odyssey, Civic, CR-V, and Fit all have controls and materials that put the previous generations to shame. I don't think it is stretching to say that they are all class leaders in their segments. The Fit and Civic put a lot of mid-sized sedans to shame.

[GXT]

You've gotta be kidding me. There are 8 shades of gray in that thing!

and you're saying it is "clearly" superior to these?

I don't think it's "clearly" superior to any of these. Sure the turn signal lever might have a nicer feel to it... but come on. What are you smoking and do you intend to share?

Comparing the washed out flash photo of the CR-V to the computer generated images of the GM cars is not exactly apples to apples.

Edited April 24, 2007 by GXT