[2bigears]

  i wonder how Honda can fix this ?? Fuel in the oil is very bad. I wonder if the gas would float on the top or mix very well while driving ?? 

[S Clark]

i wonder how Honda can fix this ?? Fuel in the oil is very bad. I wonder if the gas would float on the top or mix very well while driving ?? 

This is an issue that's been around as long as the internal combustion engine, but not with a newish car.  A car with worn rings and cylinders will leak fuel past the rings, which easily dissolves into the oil, thinning it and greatly reducing it's lubrication ability.  It's bad, very bad.  It used to mean it's time for an engine rebuild.  Years ago we inherited a grandmother's Buick.  The low mileage engine was so worn out that blow by would pressurize the crankcase and blow the oil dipstick out.   
I just bought a Mazda CX5, but tried to make a deal on a new CRV.  In light of this info I'm glad the Honda dealership were such assholes, and I took my checkbook and walked.

[Hear Clifford Brown]

Glad I read this, our SUV has 270k miles and I'm researching what to replace it with, CR-V was high on the list.  I asked my mechanic what brand they recommend, Toyota, Subaru, Honda in that order.  I said what about Mazda, he said no, the others are more reliable.  Not what I wanted to hear since I really like the CX-5.  On the other hand a friend who has rebuilt Jags, Austin Healys and a Lotus, has owned two Miatas and says they are perfectly reliable. Plus I don't think I've read a bad review of the CX-5.

[mcgsxr]

My Mom bought a new HR-V back in Sept 2018.  Problem free, but super low mileage so far.

Just picked up a 2015 Lexus NX200T.  Happy. 

Wife likes it, so I will likely get our Acura RDX. 

[S Clark]

Glad I read this, our SUV has 270k miles and I'm researching what to replace it with, CR-V was high on the list.  I asked my mechanic what brand they recommend, Toyota, Subaru, Honda in that order.  I said what about Mazda, he said no, the others are more reliable.  Not what I wanted to hear since I really like the CX-5.  On the other hand a friend who has rebuilt Jags, Austin Healys and a Lotus, has owned two Miatas and says they are perfectly reliable. Plus I don't think I've read a bad review of the CX-5.

I've driven a CRV, and RAV4, and put half a million miles on the pair at very low cost.  Mazda's have always been solid engines, but in years past, their trannies were less reliable.  That's not been the case for some time.  We'll see how well it holds up at 200K and over.   Hopefully as well as Honda and Toyota. 

[2bigears]

  honda could make the little engine warm up faster. 1.5L is so small. Not much mass.  I have an older Pilot with 250k on her. Runs like new. My friend bought one of these 1.5's so this isn't good news. 

[RDavidson]

Yeah, I read about the issues with that 1.5L engine and would probably stay away from Honda vehicles that have it (as a precaution)...which is kinda crazy because Honda is well known for their engineering prowess when it comes to engines of all kinds. The 1.5L is pretty new, though, and maybe was developed too quickly or maybe manufacturing of it hasn't been good for whatever reason? Hard to say. The Honda 2.0L 4 cylinder, 2.4L 4 cylinder, and their V6 (they only make one), are all proven reliable and have been in many Honda vehicles in one form or another for a LONG time. Even the 2.0L turbo in the new Civic Type R uses the same base engine as my nearly 10 year old Civic Si. I keep up with maintenance and have had zero problems.

[Folsom]

The 1.5L basically has the turbo always spooling, so it pretty much always has positive pressure over atmospheric. That pressure must be making the fuel get past the rings or valves or something.

Mazda engines are fine. But the paint only looks nice for a year maybe. IMO they have the worst paint on all cars, followed by Nissan (which is way less reliable).

The new Rav4 is probably a nice car but damn it's not very good looking. I'm not into the whole transformer/startrek look that is on the INSIDE of it now. I still have a 09 Rav4 (sport) and consider it the best Rav4 ever made. Whomever designed the lines on it (sport model) in and out was a genius. It's just elegantly done like a work of art (as far as a midsuv is going to get anyway) compared to most cars. It took me a long time to realize this, but as I've looked at car after car... it's become clear that Toyota has never made anything that was so tasteful in the vein of fully flowing looks integration. (old ones are more broken up lines, and look great, but are kind of the chunks of box look)







ANd then there's this....





I just think it's ugly. People think my car is new at night (during the day you can see the paint isn't brand new, interior looks almost new, can't tell at night).

[RDavidson]

Agree the new Rav 4 is really strange. It's a mess of lines and intersections everywhere...metal and plastic origami! Some Lexus vehicles are the same way with too many bold lines in general, though at least a bit more cohesive and tasteful. Over-styling has been a shared theme with a few manufactures lately while others don't push the envelope enough. It's a tough balance. I'm surprised to see Toyota take such esthetic risks with what is likely one of their most important vehicles. I'm sure that the higher trim levels (which they'll sell a lot of) look better than the lower trim levels though. And they may look better in person than in pics.

[jhm731]

I've had my 2019 RAV XLE(Magnetic Gray) for two months now.

IMO, it's a much better car than my old 2008 V6.

Drove the new CRV and Subaru Forester before I bought it.

[Folsom]

That's what drives me a little crazy. I think today cars are made better than ever in most ways, but they keep doing stuff I can't freaking stand. Sometimes it is the looks, sometimes it's safety features, sometimes it's efficiency features...

[Folsom]

Something that seriously cracks me up is that in the US at least, all the new cars are MORE POWER, faster than ever. They offer absurd amounts of power now.

And then this is coming in the EU at least first.

[JLM]

Buying SUV for mom:

1.)  Reliability (Toyota can't be beat, but keep local dealers/shops in mind)
2.)  Ease of use (getting in/out, controls - avoid fancy features)
3.)  Cost/hassle to maintain (again Toyota can't be beat)
4.)  Ask her what's important to her (like the heated seats mentioned below)

Most moms don't care about acceleration, horsepower, even looks, and the rest of the stuff car guys drool over.  Look for local service centers/dealers that don't rip off women.  Buy it for mom, not for yourself.

We bought a used 2015 RAV 4 XLE AWD with 34,000 miles on it last year (our 6th Toyota, have a very good dealer), of course no problems, and saved $8000 (came with 100,000 mile warrantee and 5 free oil changes).  It has the same engine/transmission as our 2012 Camry that has 212,000 miles on it (only rear door locks have given problems so far) and is simpler than the new ones to drive.  RAV4 gets 28 mpg, Camry gets 32 mpg in most rural driving.  Hondas require more than average scheduled maintenance and I'm leery of small engines, turbos, and CVTs.  Our 2009 Subaru Outback was confidence inspiring in any sane driving conditions, but was a very expensive hassle to maintain (poor dealership), 3 times the cost of my Toyota.  My 18 year old Mazda 626 had overheating problems that i could never shake and for a V6 was a total dud.

[Emil]

Did a little recon yesterday for the wife since it will be her daily driver and narrowed it down to these two:

This was fun to drive.
Mazda Cx5
Sharp looking. Great handling  and nice acceleration with its naturally aspirated 2.5 liter engine




VW Tiguan
Nice car but a bit more practical ( less fun)

 

Toyata Rav 4
I've had 4 Toyotas so I though this would be a no brainer.
Wife did drive this one. Didnt like the interior and it "rode like a jeep" according to her. Harsher ride than the Honda

I was going to consider the Chevy Equinox but the safety features in all the above came standard. They were only available in the higher trim levels

Just need to find time for the wife to drive the mazda and VW. I'll do my best to stay neutral

[TomS]

Did a little recon yesterday for the wife since it will be her daily driver and narrowed it down to these two:

This was fun to drive.
Mazda Cx5
Sharp looking. Great handling  and nice acceleration with its naturally aspirated 2.5 liter engine

VW Tiguan
Nice car but a bit more practical ( less fun)

Toyata Rav 4
I've had 4 Toyotas so I though this would be a no brainer.
Wife did drive this one. Didnt like the interior and it "rode like a jeep" according to her. Harsher ride than the Honda

I was going to consider the Chevy Equinox but the safety features in all the above came standard. They were only available in the higher trim levels

Just need to find time for the wife to drive the mazda and VW. I'll do my best to stay neutral

The April 2019 MotorTrend has a nice comparison review of 8 small SUV's. Unlike audio reviewers, they were actually fairly honest about them. The comments on the Equinox were brutal, but accurate in my experience. I'd take the CX5 all day long, though we've had 5 CR-V's.

[RDavidson]

I've seen a couple of the new Rav4's out, and can confirm that they do look better in person than in some pics. The rear quarter looks a bit weird at some angles, like it juts outward at the tail light as you can see in Folsom's pic. And there are still some other odd styling choices, but overall I think it's fine.

Folsom, I do agree with you too that the combination of options and stuff on today's cars is frustrating. It's pretty much impossible just to get a basic, stripped down, work truck with a bench seat anymore....let alone a truck for less than $50k. Same with cars. It's like you have to buy all the options or no options. With the latter the list of customizations is really short and by the time you pick a couple of things you want...well, you may as well pick the next model up in the line. In general, and this is my opinion, cars are so bloated with junk we don't need. Note, I enjoy actually driving my car. I like rowing my own gears. I like the human engagement it requires. I also understand I'm more of an enthusiast and not the average consumer.

Anyway, sorry for the slight tangent. Just wanted to redact a few of my initial thoughts on the new Rav4. It's really not all that messy / weird, though it is certainly a departure from previous years which can be hard to digest at first.

[Folsom]

Funny you say that. I've been browsing new trucks and wondering about a bench seat so my dog can sit next to me (he's small). They tend to come on the lesser trucks I have lesser interest in 

[I.Greyhound Fan]

You can get the CX5 with a turbo that produces 250hp.  I recently bought the new Mazda 6 Grand Touring Reserve edition with the 2.5 turbo.  It is an awesome car.  It rides and handles like a german car and has a luxury interior, nicer than most Mercedes.  The Mazda  CX5 has a similar interior and same engine.  We are going to buy one next year for my wife.

Also take a look at the Hyundai Kona, it drives like a sports sedan and it is quick.

[sounddog]

I've been shopping for a compact SUV and here are my 2 cents. I limited my search to Japanese cars that have good reliability ratings from Consumer Reports and very good crash test results (thus, I didn't look at the Nissan Rogue).

I liked the Mazda CX-5 a lot: most engaging to drive, quiet, good ride, good safety features (especially liked the heads up display), excellent safety test results (both IIHS and NHTSA), I liked the size (though if you need lots of room, you might want to look elsewhere); negatives were seat comfort for my wife (though I thought it was pretty good)-especially very limited fore-aft travel of the driver's seat, OK but not great gas mileage, USB port in front console is too weak to recharge a cell phone (have to use the port in the rear for that).

I liked the Honda CRV for its overall utility and conveniences, very good gas mileage, comfortable seats (but my wife tends not to like Honda seats), pretty good ride, very good safety features and IIHS/NHTSA test results. Negatives were noise on acceleration (otherwise the car was fairly quiet-better than previous CRV versions), wider turning circle than Mazda and Forester (a typical Honda characteristic).

I also liked the Subaru Forester (and my wife loved it) for its very comfortable seats, great visibility, good safety features and IIHS/NHTSA test results, pretty good ride and handling, very good gas mileage, great cargo capacity; main negative was the boxer 4 cylinder engine which is still underpowered (though it's somewhat better than previous Foresters) and which sounds quite coarse on hard acceleration (the car was very quiet when it wasn't accelerating).

I was least impressed by the new Toyota RAV4. I liked its safety features, decent ride and handling (better than prior versions), fairly comfortable seats; but negatives included frequent noise whenever the transmission was shifting gears, oddly the front passenger seat is 1-2" higher than the driver's seat and lacks any height adjustment in any trim level (I'm not tall but felt uncomfortably close to the roof), doors do not open wide enough to make entry and exit easy, IIHS test results (no NHTSA results yet) are very good except that the headlights rated only marginal.

So if the Forester still had a turbo version, I would buy it (if it were just for me and not also for my wife, I'd probably buy the Mazda). I may wait for the 2020 Subaru Outback since it looks like it probably will have a turbo model.

I hope this might be useful to some of you.

[Folsom]

Did you look at the Highlander? It's really not bigger on the outside than the Outback, only 3 inches longer. If it makes sense economically the hybrid version is killer for in town commutes at 30mpg.

I'm with you, 182hp is fairly dated without a turbo for low end torque like CRV has (but wait for improved non fuel-oil mixing one). The boxer engines have less torque to start with.