I am having a mad moment. Have been offered a not too silly deal on a new one of these.
I had one 10 years ago and I could just about get 30 out of it. Any hearsay on the current model welcome. It clearly won't be as good as the diesel, and will have higher VED, but against that they are cheaper, don't have DPFs and servicing is allegedly cheaper.
I realise economy's a lot to do with how it's used - I like to keep rolling, don't spend a lot of time in traffic and I'm generally fairly economical.
Thoughts?
|
Just put the details into spiritmonitor de, a v useful website where people post their real life mpg. It comes out at 27 to 28 mpg for the 2.0 petrol.
The 2.2 diesel is giving 38mpg.
|
Same engine and slightly better gearbox than the Mk2.
Expect similar MPG.
Also got 27-28mpg from a CRV 2 auto.
Getting 30-34mpg from an FRV 1.8 auto with huuuge 5th gear.
|
Thanks chaps.
Probably need to talk myself out of this and either keep the Outlander or try for a diesel auto, which I should have bought instead last year. Or perhaps broaden the net a bit...
|
The fuelly.com site is also reporting an overall 28 mpg for petrol CR-Vs
www.fuelly.com/car/honda/cr-v/gas%20l4
Last edited by: lancara on Thu 29 Mar 12 at 22:35
|
Don't do it Manatee, you've been there and know very well that the only fault with the CRV is fuel consumption.
We wish we had ours back sometime...then we remember the trip to Cornwall in head wind with the van on;(
Pat
|
|
I think I've talked myself out of it, thanks! Might be tempted by a diesel auto when there's one available. An extra £10 a week in fuel isn't a disaster, but forking out the cost to change for the privilege out of the pension fund doesn't seem like financial probity!
|
|
I've considered buying a petrol CRV myself. Not really bothered about the fuel figures as I don't cover a great mileage, it's the excessive road tax that puts me off.
|
|
Bob Gerard's will sell you an auto EX for 24k OTR with everything that opens and shuts, and they're very fair on p/x in my experience. VED is £245 - just paid £190 for the Outlander.
|
|
I thought the VED on the petrol model was £445, Manatee? If it's £245, it's not that much more than I'm forking out now.
|
The £445 is the year one rate. It's in band J, rates here: goo.gl/t8UH0
The Honda website is fairly useless - they're doing themselves no favours by just showing the £445.
Last edited by: Manatee on Fri 30 Mar 12 at 08:12
|
>>they're doing themselves no favours by just showing the £445.
>>goo.gl/t8UH0
Thanks for that. I've bookmarked your link.
As I mentioned above, petrol consumption isn't an issue for me with my meagre annual mileage.
Honda CRV added to shortlist.
|
If you're planning on a long-term purchase the CRV needs to be in there, and petrol ones are some of the most reliable 'SUV's around.
In common with Honda petrol engines, they don't even raise an eyebrow if you rev them to 6500+ rpm.
You've got to look hard to find reports of mechanical failure for petrol CRV 2s - the CRV 3s had some early issues with steering rack springs.
Personally, I'd go petrol every time for a Honda.
|
£100/yr extra road tax puts you off more than £3-400/yr extra fuel?
Makes sense...
**EDIT** - Clk's reply does make sense :-)
It's not in the £400+/yr banding for roat tax, even the Mk2 auto was<225g/km CO2.
Last edited by: Lygonos on Fri 30 Mar 12 at 07:55
|
With every car I've ever had, I've been able to get better than the official combined figure and close to the official urban figure. I drive spiritedly with no attempt to drive economically. The thing I do which is different from what most people do is to calculate a true average over a long period of time ~ namely the life of the car to date. Even calculating a month at a time is a waste of time because the fuel consumption varies with the types of journeys and the weather for that month.
Signed: L'escargot by name but not by nature.
Last edited by: L'escargot on Fri 30 Mar 12 at 10:01
|
But what do you do with your long-term average, l'Es? I know that the long-term average (nearly 130,000 miles now) for my Volvo is about 45mpg. But I also know that it goes down marginally in winter - more if I do a lot of short journeys, which doesn't often apply these days - and that it went from 42 to 47 when I started regular long motorway cruises.
In other words, I have enough data to predict what a particular journey, at a particular time of year, is likely to cost in fuel. I couldn't do that with only a long-term average.
Separately, I think fewer cars these days achieve their 'Combined' mpg in real use. My guess - and that's all it is - is that it's an effect of compliance with later emission-control standards, but this is mainly because the Euro-III Volvo can do it and the Euro-IV Verso can't. What I've read on the ever-reliable Internet seems to support the hypothesis, though.
|
>> But what do you do with your long-term average, l'Es?
At the end of each month I calculate (and record in Excel) the fuel consumption for that month against the odometer reading and the date (i.e. year and month). I calculate the overall average consumption since I acquired the car and record that against the date. When I had my old computer I plotted graphs of the three things in Microsoft Works. When I got my new computer I was able to transfer across the data but lost the graphs. When I get a round tuit, I'll plot the graphs in Excel.
What do I do with all this information? I suppose I don't do anything useful with it ~ I just like recording data and plotting graphs. It was one of the things I had to do when I was working and I suppose I became addicted to it.
Last edited by: L'escargot on Fri 30 Mar 12 at 15:24
|
Honda CR-V III - CRV petrol auto - real world economy? - Baz
