Author Topic: Comparison Test: 2013 Honda CR-V vs. 2013 Toyota RAV4 (Read 23911 times)

Autos_Editor · « **on:** April 15, 2013, 06:31:22 am »

We pit these two Canadian-built compact SUVs against each other in a head-to-head grudge match.

Read More...

Frontier1 · « **Reply #1 on:** April 15, 2013, 06:51:29 am »

Looks >>> CRV
Interior >>> CRV
Ground clearance >>> CRV (170 vs 159)

CRV for me.

Snowman · « **Reply #2 on:** April 15, 2013, 07:15:21 am »

Can't go wrong with either but the driveline would tip the scales for me towards the Rav4.

Shnak · « **Reply #3 on:** April 15, 2013, 07:46:37 am »

So, the FWD RAV4 is better equipped than the AWD CR-V for the same price? Well, color me shocked!

Seriously, if both have AWD, and for the same price, which then offers the better equipment?

Also, it's surprising and disappointing to see that the FWD RAV4 weighs more than the AWD CR-V... Add AWD to the RAV4, and how does its engine compare to the CR-V's, then?

I guess my biggest issue throughout this comparison is how you dismiss the fact that the CR-V bests the RAV4 in many criterias despite being AWD. To me, that's impressive.

After keeping both cars for the remainder of the week and following similar use, the gap remained with the RAV4 finishing at 9.5 and the CR-V at 9.3 (as it did over the course of an entire long-term test). On paper, this is a win for the Honda, though in reality, you wouldn’t be saving enough to buy a latte at every fill-up, and both use regular gas, so no penalties there.

So, even though the CR-V comes with AWD, it's lighter and more fuel economic than the FWD RAV4? That's pretty incredible. Also, the RAV4 went from one of the bigger 'small CUVs' to being smaller than the CR-V. Plus they got rid of the V6... This new RAV4 doesn't seem better than the outgoing model in any significant category, or perhaps more importantly, not better than its direct competition in any significant category...

hemusbull · « **Reply #4 on:** April 15, 2013, 08:33:51 am »

The fight between equals is just a little different. Rav4 has a task to adapt new changes like no V6, no outside tire, no asade open gate to the package. Honda's task is just to refine evolutionary the previous model, which is easier of both. Anyway, you'll be right choosing any of these two.

safristi · « **Reply #5 on:** April 15, 2013, 08:40:25 am »

Oh brothers can we have an AMEN in the corner here..(gratuitous Masters golf reference for the Ozzies on board)..they are both Cute Canuck Twins...born 100Kms apart to different parents...... the CrV is now the cute RUNT(spell check pleeze!

) of the litter..the Rav 4 her just, a wee bit ,buffer sister....Woodstock vs Alliston..........two birds of the same Far East FATHER..............adopt the one that pleases U..neither did it for Moi..........

redman · « **Reply #6 on:** April 15, 2013, 08:52:21 am »

I was initially wondering why the CRV beat out the Rav's fuel economy numbers, until the vehicles weights came into play. Some vehicles weights are getting out of control.
mated to another where the bottom of the rear window meets the rest of the rest of the lift gate.

As far as looks Volvo has the best rear of any small SUV's for my money, although I know their in a different price class.

I think pulling out a very efficient V6 was a mistake on Toyota's part especially in light on the new Rav's weight.

Even in the previous Rav the V6 beat out many comparable 4's in fuel economy .

johngenx · « **Reply #7 on:** April 15, 2013, 09:38:08 am »

The AWD systems on these cars don't consume much fuel, and 8.9 and 9.1 are pretty much identical.

If I were buying the previous generation RAV, I would have gone for the V-6, but evidently not enough people were to justify the production costs of offering it.

whaddaiknow · « **Reply #8 on:** April 15, 2013, 09:45:54 am »

Quote from: Autos_Editor on April 15, 2013, 06:31:22 am

We pit these two Canadian-built compact SUVs against each other in a head-to-head grudge match.

Read More...

I test drove both these vehicles last Saturday. I brought my 5-year-old along. I did my daily routine of loading the kids in the car and strapping them in the car seats. The CRV was a breeze, RAV4 - not so much - would be good enough for me but the CRV was just that easy. The car seat fits like a glove, the latch is exactly where I would want it to be and I was able to use the latch with one hand on first attempt. I was impressed how easy it was.

100% agree with the review on the interior and the ride quality. I, too, immediately noticed the inconveniently located row of buttons under the lip in the RAV4. One other odd thing I noticed with the RAV4 - even though it was a cloudy day, the NAV screen reflected so much light coming in from the front passenger door window that rendered the right half of the screen useless - I couldn't see anything there.

In the end, I personally won't buy either - both engines were very buzzy under acceleration and the level of noise is too high for my liking.

I test drove 3 other car the same day - Avalon, Crosstour, and the Accord V6. That was a different story for another thread.

Solstice2006 · « **Reply #9 on:** April 15, 2013, 09:46:58 am »

"Without going all the way up to XLE trim, you can get the 6 speakers, 6.1-inch touchscreen display, tinted windows, cargo cover and back-up camera as a $1,000 upgrade package on the FWD or AWD LE trim"

That's a pretty decent value. Not as common to be able to add packages to an existing trim, often you have to go to a higher trim, and pay for stuff you don't want.

If I had to choose between the two, it would be the CRV (but non AWD), but I am looking forward to the larger comparo in the summer that includes the CX-5 (with the 2.5L)

Nice detailed review Jonathan

dutch · « **Reply #10 on:** April 15, 2013, 10:18:29 am »

Glad we bought the last generation Rav with the V6!

safristi · « **Reply #11 on:** April 15, 2013, 10:25:29 am »

so are we................Inco Saf Random and Id..........

Vanstar · « **Reply #12 on:** April 15, 2013, 11:58:31 am »

But where are the manual diesel models?

SaskSpecV · « **Reply #13 on:** April 15, 2013, 12:09:43 pm »

This was another fantastic comparison. The point-by-point breakdown is invaluable for readers, and far more useful than the cursory summary you get in so many auto comparisons.

Now bring on the Escape, Forester, and CX-5 (2.5L) comparisons!

jaari · « **Reply #14 on:** April 15, 2013, 12:20:41 pm »

If I had to choose, the CRV ...
In reality something else maybe a Santa Fe once new model kinks are worked out.

dragonfly · « **Reply #15 on:** April 15, 2013, 12:34:11 pm »

And the winner is? Neither....Jack

tooscoops · « **Reply #16 on:** April 15, 2013, 12:45:20 pm »

though these are two good vehicles... i just feel its odd that the winner (and winner of so many other contests)...

is a boring looking. harsh looking/feeling. underpowered. a bit pricey...

i feel like this market is one that is missing a real leader.

i can see why new launches like the sante fe and new escape are picking up so many sales.

Spec5 · « **Reply #17 on:** April 15, 2013, 12:58:41 pm »

Great review! Of course can't say enough how much its appreciated that you do the 2 car seat test with your wife in the middle. The MIL is thinking about replacing her Sentra within the next year and she wants to go CUV (for the better visibility and AWD mainly). I was actually surprised that your wife could fit in between the 2 car seats in the CRV - I'm wondering would a "normal" sized female fit in there? I'm thinking more along the lines of 5'7" 150lbs.

I think the CRV would be the way I would go as well but based on how anemic the engine seems to be I'd probably look at a Santa Fe Sport AWD for pretty much the same price and get little more space to boot.

Solstice2006 · « **Reply #18 on:** April 15, 2013, 01:11:07 pm »

Quote from: tooscoops on April 15, 2013, 12:45:20 pm

though these are two good vehicles... i just feel its odd that the winner (and winner of so many other contests)...

is a boring looking. harsh looking/feeling. underpowered. a bit pricey...

i feel like this market is one that is missing a real leader.

i can see why new launches like the sante fe and new escape are picking up so many sales.

I suspect the Santa Fe and the Escape are doing so well, is they provide more than powertrain, the turbo 4 cylinders. I don't think we will see the Santa Fe or the Equinox in the comparison, as they are over 6" and 9" longer than the CR-V.

whaddaiknow · « **Reply #19 on:** April 15, 2013, 01:19:33 pm »

Quote from: Spec5 on April 15, 2013, 12:58:41 pm

Great review! Of course can't say enough how much its appreciated that you do the 2 car seat test with your wife in the middle. The MIL is thinking about replacing her Sentra within the next year and she wants to go CUV (for the better visibility and AWD mainly). I was actually surprised that your wife could fit in between the 2 car seats in the CRV - I'm wondering would a "normal" sized female fit in there? I'm thinking more along the lines of 5'7" 150lbs.

I think the CRV would be the way I would go as well but based on how anemic the engine seems to be I'd probably look at a Santa Fe Sport AWD for pretty much the same price and get little more space to boot.

The back seat in the CRV is a bench and is not contoured so the carseats can be moved all the way out leaving more room in the middle than any other midsize car I've tried including Avalon, X3, RAV4, Accord, Crosstour. I could fit inbetween with ease, and I am taller than 5'7" and heavier than 150lbs.