More 2010 Honda CR-V pictures
Last Updated:
Not much news inside. Where it needed the most work.
And that’s the top of the line version starting at almost $27 000. Not so cheap of a car.
Again, the CR-V is a great car for most people, obviously. But it’s still not for me.
That interior alone would keep me away…
This is a high-volume sales car. The interior must be subdued. Having an avantgarde interior would be bad for business.
There are so many things academically wrong with this front end. It seems to me that the designgineers were trying to accommodate cooling requirement while retaining some sort of vestige of a mass-appeal chrome grill. Some honor is paid to trend with the subtle boomerang-esque nature of the bottom-edge of the headlamp that is filled with utterly conventional, cost-cutter headlamp reflexes. This hole-conundrum combined with the triple-plan view, light-catcher-blips (which are probably to accommodate a bumper-beam) that are crashing into the triple-plan-view theme line, that are also punctured with a you-can't-have-it here fog lamp holes leave me shaking my head. C'mon Honda- Stop playing pin the feature on the package with your customers' money and make your cars stink the engineering superiority you know you have.
I assume the rear saw NO change.
Honda is turning into GM.
[This is a high-volume sales car. The interior must be subdued. Having an avantgarde interior would be bad for business.]
You're right, "avantgarde" would be innappropriate, but what about a having a quality look and feel. This thing looks very low budget. Look at Forester for example, not a great design, nor is it avantgarde, but its quality appears to be far better than the CRV interior.
$27???????? I think you mis-read it. This can't possibly sell for much over $17k. There's nothing to it.
Vince, I have to disagree with you on this one. I think the interior is tasteful and comfortable, and definitely the most appealing feature of this vehicle. It's the exterior (esp. the front end) that could use some changes. My biggest criticism is that the back seats don't fold into the floor. That should definitely be fixed when the car is updated next.
yuk yuk yuk this little dud of a cuv is really a tiny mini van….did I say Yuk yet?
Isn't that the old dash from the Dodge Caliber? The $14,000 base model? Before they IMPROVED the Dodge? I don't like the exterior or the dash, but those Checker Marathon seats are really nostalgic! Is the cup- holder/consoule made of cardboard? -or just Honda's new economical hard plastic? And that Oddessy dash/shifter gives it that RUGGED SUV look!-NOT
How are the two interiors different? LOL!
THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS INTERIOR!!! How much more functional can you get? The plastics are NOT crappy, and there are no panel gaps at all! Since when is Honda about style anyway? Its about the driver being connected to the road. Read any review on this car and that's exactly what it does. It does its job and rewards the driver. And it doesn't even have to be fast to be rewarding (its definitely NOT fast).
simply fug!
I think that no car site mentions more about the interiors of cars than this site. I would like to request what are your top 10 car interiors. and what makes them "work" for you so i can take a test drive for myself.
for me this honda looks functional and much like the other honda's i have seen.
My neighbor got one of these two months ago. She got every option but the navigation, because she said she wasn't too stupid to use a map. After taking a day trip in it I found the interior to be nice. Not fabulous but nice. It seemed to suit the rest of the automobile very well.
Granted, people put a little too much stock into interior quality but for near 30k the CR-V should be more then just funtional.
It's a $20K car…The interior is friggin fine!
Never will listen to complainers on any car forum.
If it looks good inside and out ( As it does right now )with enough power for my needs, I will buy it as soon as its released, since it fits me just fine.
🙂
The front end of the current one looks like a freak designed it. This looks a little better.
That's funny, when Kia shown the Forte EX's interior, people were saying it looked too gray.
The Steering wheel reminds me of the Kia Kue's wheel back in 2007. If Kia copied the CRV'S steering wheel so what. The tail lights of the CRV still looks like Saab or Volvo's.
THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING RIGHT WITH THIS INTERIOR!!! How much more disfunctional can you get? The plastics are – plasticky. Since when is Honda about style anyway? -let alone good design. Its about the driver being disconnected to the rest of the world. And it doesn't even have to be rewarding. (its definitely NOT fast). Because people who buy this have never even test driven the 2010 Chevy Equinox — let alone compared MPG, price, quality, interior designs, exterior styling between CR-V & Equinox. You know shat they say about ignorant Honda loyalists — there's one born every minute. And for those dumb enough to spend over $30k on this sucker; keep in mind that the small Cadillacs have had better resale value the last two years in a row. (The 2010 SRX is similar in configuration to the CR-V.) Seriously! -come out of your Honda Coma and do a little comparison shopping!
this is pure crap all arounf inside na ans d out plus these timm ny boxes arent safe d ffor americasn theuire just too smalll if you want some suv grt a tahoe
Yup…Pure crap…And needs sound proofing as well…Dont want to make the pig too heavy so that that grunt engine cant get it moving.
Yes, interiors uses hard plastics a lot now but these surfaces are grained to give it a high quality look and appeal. Also, are we forgetting the fact that this is NOT a mattress or pillow but a dash of a car?
Soft-touch material matters when you have to interact with it. Armrests, seats, steering wheel, etc. I don't care if the far front corner of the dash by the windshield is padded or not.
You can't gauge the quality of an interior from a picture or from the comments of a few. A test drive and a few minutes in the driver seat will mean more than anything you read here.
Focus on visibility, ergonomics, features, overall appeal, colors, comfort … not "oh, the dash uses hard plastic, no way".
Everything I've said above is generic to all vehicles. Sure, some vehicles would hold higher expectations (luxury brands) but let's not forget that this is a CR-V, not a luxury marquee. People can never be satisfied with an improvement because they don't compare within the segment.
My problem with the CR-V is the lack of a center console on non EX-L models. It works for some but not for me. The CR-V interior storage leaves much to be desired for me. Comparisons like this is what matters to me, but others may not share the same sentiment.
"Anonymous said…
Yes, interiors uses hard plastics a lot now but these surfaces are grained to give it a high quality look and appeal. Also, are we forgetting the fact that this is NOT a mattress or pillow but a dash of a car?
Soft-touch material matters when you have to interact with it. Armrests, seats, steering wheel, etc. I don't care if the far front corner of the dash by the windshield is padded or not.
You can't gauge the quality of an interior from a picture or from the comments of a few. A test drive and a few minutes in the driver seat will mean more than anything you read here.
Focus on visibility, ergonomics, features, overall appeal, colors, comfort … not "oh, the dash uses hard plastic, no way".
Everything I've said above is generic to all vehicles. Sure, some vehicles would hold higher expectations (luxury brands) but let's not forget that this is a CR-V, not a luxury marquee. People can never be satisfied with an improvement because they don't compare within the segment.
My problem with the CR-V is the lack of a center console on non EX-L models. It works for some but not for me. The CR-V interior storage leaves much to be desired for me. Comparisons like this is what matters to me, but others may not share the same sentiment.
September 14, 2009 9:35 AM"
By far one of the most useful and informed comments I have ever read on this site, ever.
This isn't a luxury vehicle. When you compare its materials and fit and finish to other vehicles in its segment it comes out on top.
I actually like the flip down console that you were speaking of. I like it more than a console since you can flip it down and walk into the back if you need to on road trips with the kids.
Hey Vince, first off, I like the site!
I think the refresh is fantastic. It has addressed many of the issues that people have been complaining about. I don't think you can knock it for getting MORE horsepower and better MPG.
I agree with the others, I don't really know why people are bashing the interior, it is at least on par or better than the competition.
"Anonymous said…
THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING RIGHT WITH THIS INTERIOR!!! How much more disfunctional can you get? The plastics are – plasticky. Since when is Honda about style anyway? -let alone good design. Its about the driver being disconnected to the rest of the world. And it doesn't even have to be rewarding. (its definitely NOT fast). Because people who buy this have never even test driven the 2010 Chevy Equinox — let alone compared MPG, price, quality, interior designs, exterior styling between CR-V & Equinox. You know shat they say about ignorant Honda loyalists — there's one born every minute. And for those dumb enough to spend over $30k on this sucker; keep in mind that the small Cadillacs have had better resale value the last two years in a row. (The 2010 SRX is similar in configuration to the CR-V.) Seriously! -come out of your Honda Coma and do a little comparison shopping!
September 13, 2009 8:08 AM"
There are many points that I can address here but I'll start with two:
1. The CR-V is CHEAPER than the Equinox, especially when you factor in total cost to own.
2. There isn't a single CR-V model that is over $30,000.
3. What in the hell do small Cadillacs resale value have to do with the Equinox??? Absolutely nothing. On the whole, GM resale value is absymal.
4. Quality??? Really? I don't think that JD Power and Consumer Reports agree with your GM has higher quality statement.
5. Exterior and interior styling is better? Styling is not measurable since it is subjective. If it could be measured, I think the CR-V would win because it is constantly a best seller.
Come out of your GM bias coma and actually DO SOME RESEARCH!!!
When you hit a truck head on at 70 MPH, you will understand why people want soft plastic on the dash.
I'll be getting one of these soon, this or the Crosstour if they offer that with a manual and AWD!
My wife really likes the Crosstour and the CR-V.
TO THE COCKY (but incorrect) September 14, 2009 12:49PM………"The CR-V is CHEAPER than the Equinox, when you factor in total cost to own." –NOT!!! MSRP: Chevy Equinox:$23,185; Honda CRV: 29,655. Financing just exacerbates the problem: Est’d payments at 5.89%: Costly Honda:$572/mo; Economical Chevy:$448/mo. And Chevy=22mpg city/32 Hwy –vs- CRV’s 20MPG city / 26 Hwy. Those are just FACTS. Consider the time value of money and the Honda looks even worse. You can replace the whole engine in the Chevy and still have spent thousands less than the Honda would have cost you.
(2) The winner of Kelly blue Books 2009 best resale value award is a CADILLAC – not Honda or Acura. Cadillac (CTS) won Car & Driver’s “10 best cars for 2009”. (3) Autopacifica’s 2009 Vehicle satisfaction Awards, based on experiences of REAL new car OWNERS named GM (Cadillac) as TOP BRAND FOR THE SECOND STRAIGHT YEAR; -not Honda, not toyota. I mention Cad because the Cadillac SRX is to the Chevy Equinox like the Acura MDX is to the Honda CR-V; Same mechanicals / more features. The Chevy has an interior comparable in style & quality to the Acura; unlike the cheap& ugly CRV. So HONDA products cost more to buy, more to finance, more to buy gas for, and have worse resale (than GM’s). And four all that extra cost you get to ride around in one of the ugliest and slowest little slugs on the road. It’s time to wake up from your Honda Coma; you're living in the past!
What's a GM? Didn't the ignorant thugs destroy the place a while ago?
When you hit a truck head on at 70 MPH, you will understand why people want soft plastic on the dash.
Have you ever heard of seat belts and airbags? They've been in all the papers.
Do you really think you are going to survive a 70 MPH head on with a truck? LOL!
The $27k price that everyone keeps repeating is for the top of the line EXL with navigation. The entry level LX, still nicely equipped is in the $21k price range and 09 clearance prices can bring this under $20k.
A lot of Honda haters here as usual. When you have the top selling car in its class with proven resale value at the top of the list for years on end, then commence with your hating.
"The $27k price that everyone keeps repeating is for the top of the line EXL with navigation. "
Not quite.
CR-V EX-L: $26,755
Navigation adds $1,577.
A loaded one with AWD is $ 29,655
To the seriously misinformed poster at September 14, 2009 5:03 PM:
FOR MODELS CURRENTLY ON SALE:
– Base Honda CR-V: $21,245
– Base Chevy Equinox: $22,440
– Loaded AWD CR-V EX-L Navi: $28,945
– LTZ Chevy Equinox NO NAVIGATION, NO SUNROOF, FOUR CYLINDER: $30,540
– LOADED LTZ Chevy Equinox NO NAVIGATION: $33,745
No navigation for $30,000+???? That is a joke.
So, no matter what way you look at it the CR-V is cheaper. I don't know what that guy is arguing about.
Also, Consumer Reports rated Honda as the #1 vehicle manufacturer so I think that bit right there trumps everything that he has mentioned. A $50,000 Cadillac is not a $30,000 Equinox so that is a dumb comparison.
Thank you Vince for clearing up the question of the CR-V's price. When you said 27k I had a feeling that didn't include the NAV.
So Honda is adding about $1200 the price for a couple of design tweeks and engine improvements.
Again, at near 30k what am I getting with the CR-V that can't be done just as well and in many cases better by other SUV's? Can someone point out anything other then it being a Honda?
For me it was never about how good it was; just what I'm getting for the money. From what I can see it's not worth it.
"Anonymous said…
Thank you Vince for clearing up the question of the CR-V's price. When you said 27k I had a feeling that didn't include the NAV.
So Honda is adding about $1200 the price for a couple of design tweeks and engine improvements.
Again, at near 30k what am I getting with the CR-V that can't be done just as well and in many cases better by other SUV's? Can someone point out anything other then it being a Honda?
For me it was never about how good it was; just what I'm getting for the money. From what I can see it's not worth it.
September 15, 2009 10:03 AM"
The price increases are negligible. The highest increase was $800 I believe, which is right in line with industry wide price increases for MMC vehicles and even incremental yearly increases. So, to summarize the prices haven't gone up that much at all.
How is the CR-V not worth it??? What else would you get in its segment? It is already class leading at a very competitive price. It is highly regarded by all publications and owners, it is bulletproof reliable citing JD Power and Consumer Reports, and its technology is proven.
Sure, you can move up to a larger SUV but then you will be getting a base model and you are at the bottom of the ladder again.
For me, the CR-V has win written all over it.
I am a big fan of the CR-V.
I don't own one yet but I can't wait to get rid of my 2006 Trailblazer. It was given to me when my aunt passed away but I honestly hate it. It GUZZLES gas and feels like it isn't even connected to the road, the bushings must be made out of marshmallow. The interior is also terribly finished, but I digress.
I had a 1997 CR-V and a 2002 CR-V and I loved both of them. You can't say no to a free car though that had less than 20,000 miles.
"It is already class leading"
Again, It's not about how many are being bought or how good it is. What does it bring to the table for 30k that can't be done better by other SUV's? Many others have gotten awards and accolades as well but as far as the truck itself, on a substantive level, what can it do better then others for 30k?
"Sure, you can move up to a larger SUV but then you will be getting a base model and you are at the bottom of the ladder again."
Not really. There are a number of well equipped mid-sized SUV that, quite frankly, will have some equipment not found on the CR-V. They may not have leather or navigation but they will be comfortable and possibly more functional nevertheless.
So why a CR-V?
"Anonymous said…
So why a CR-V?
September 15, 2009 1:15 PM"
1. Talk to anyone who has owned one. They all love theirs.
2. Consumer Reports loves them and they love Honda.
3. JD Power rates the residual very high, higher than anything else in its segment and its quality as well.
4. Major automotive publications love it as well, EVEN IF it isn't the sportiest choice which says a lot. They always pick something sporty to love.
5. I could go on forever.
1.-,2.-,3.-,4.-,
5."I could go on forever"
I basically asked the same question twice – "What does it bring to the table for 30k that can't be done better by other SUV's?" – and it hasn't been answered.
I can only determine from this is that the only reason to get a CR-V is because other people like it. Not because it offers anything over other autos and this is the problem I have with Honda. They take advantage of their popularity not by presenting products that are any better then the competition but by making buyers THINK they are. Of course all manufacturers do this to a certain level but many will offer something substantive. Fuel economy, large interior, HP, etc. But Honda's marketing is centered around it being "Honda" and that's it. Unfortunately, judging by the responses, all Honda has to do is put a badge on anything, present it at any price and it will sell.
Vince do you know if the 2010 LX CR-V will have the same chromed plastic front grille as the EX and EX-L or will they paint it the same color as the vehicle?
"Anonymous said…
1.-,2.-,3.-,4.-,
5."I could go on forever"
I basically asked the same question twice – "What does it bring to the table for 30k that can't be done better by other SUV's?" – and it hasn't been answered.
I can only determine from this is that the only reason to get a CR-V is because other people like it. Not because it offers anything over other autos and this is the problem I have with Honda. They take advantage of their popularity not by presenting products that are any better then the competition but by making buyers THINK they are. Of course all manufacturers do this to a certain level but many will offer something substantive. Fuel economy, large interior, HP, etc. But Honda's marketing is centered around it being "Honda" and that's it. Unfortunately, judging by the responses, all Honda has to do is put a badge on anything, present it at any price and it will sell.
September 16, 2009 10:01 AM"
I am not the same poster as the other person, but if you want a good reason all you have to do is read through some of the postive (not anti-Honda) comments or talk to anyone who has owned one.
People have explained to you why it is the best choice, and I think that Consumer Reports calling Honda the #1 manufacturer pulls a lot of weight.