Topic: Comparison Test: 2015 Honda CR-V vs Nissan Rogue

[Autos_Editor]

Raining champs.
Read More...

[G.Bombay]

Really nice photos in this article. Nice work!

Is it just me or do these two appear to look the same? Inside and out.

[Great_Big_Abyss]

Really nice photos in this article. Nice work!

Is it just me or do these two appear to look the same? Inside and out.

Them and almost every other CUV in the segment....

[redman]

Good comparison. I like the new Rogue styling.
A bit floored that either one one of these can be pushed over 35K.
The two grand price difference would most likely be made up on resale (if reselling) with the CRV.
Be curious to see how the residual rates compare, for lease purposes.

[Noto]

I've said my bit, but will highlight in simple:

Pros for CRV: Powertrain, general handling, resale value, and clean trunk space.
Pros for Rogue:  Ride comfort (basically anything to do with the suspension, incl the torque-vectoring), by far better interior (cargo area excluded). 

While JY really liked the 'utility' in the Rogue, the trunk was unfinished, plasticy, and rattled far too much for my liking.  The CRV was the easier vehicle to live with, but the Rogue showed what an interior should be.

As always, no one vehicle is 'perfect', but pick your preferences.

[Fobroader]

Great review....can't believe Im saying this, but I would take the Rogue. I think it looks a bit better, dashboard isnt as cheap and most importantly it won't have that failure of an AWD system the CR-V has.

[Northernridge]

Superb comeback by Nissan with the new Rogue...eons better looking than the previous lump.

[EV-Light]

Great review, but I dislike both...my pick in this category is the Mazda CX5.

[sacrat]

"However, we do have to pick a winner, and that car, by the hair of its chinny chin chin, is the CR-V, with a strong nod to Honda’s brand equity and the resale value it presents."

I find it problematic (at best) to include resale in a comparison test like this. Most families are shopping on a budget and are only concerned with current outlay. Perhaps residual value will matter if you are leasing, but may be offset in this case by Nissan's more aggressive discounts in addition to it's better initial value. With this many unknown factors, I believe that resale is best just left out of the equation. I was bemused when after the Rogue smoked the CR-V in value, you compared other trims to see if it got better (It didn't).

"In the end, though, Brendan probably put it best: “The Rogue is a car I’d like to drive a long ways, and the CR-V is a car I’d like to own for a long time.”

What?!?. So the vehicle with less comfortable seats and serious design flaws in the infotainment is the one you want to own longer? The only serious flaw mentioned in the Rogue is installing the Child Seat which may or may not be an issue depending if other car seats work better. It likely can be overcome. The less comfortable seats and useless infotainment system are forever.

Finally this: "...it doesn’t feel quite as granular as the CR-V does".

I looked this up and still can't figure out what is meant here. There is a modern usage where a boss might request "more granularity" (detail) in a report. Perhaps you mean finer detailing in the CR-V ? Here is a discussion on how the word is (mis)used to make people sound smarter when plain English will do just fine.

http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/53266/is-the-word-granular-a-synonym-for-the-word-specific

Given the above, the outcome seems contrived. On paper and on the road, the Rogue appears to be the clear winner.

[Great_Big_Abyss]

"In the end, though, Brendan probably put it best: “The Rogue is a car I’d like to drive a long ways, and the CR-V is a car I’d like to own for a long time.”

What?!?. So the vehicle with less comfortable seats and serious design flaws in the infotainment is the one you want to own longer? The only serious flaw mentioned in the Rogue is installing the Child Seat which may or may not be an issue depending if other car seats work better. It likely can be overcome. The useless infotainment system is forever.

Less comfortable seats and flawed infotainment notwithstanding, the CRV is still a nice vehicle and I'm sure would be plenty satisfactory on the highway.  I think that was Brendan's nod to the longevity of most Hondas.  If you buy a Honda, you'll be able to keep it for 20 problem free years, that's the kinda thing he was talking about. 

Oh, and as far as child seats are concerned, the numbers of times I take them out and put them back in is few and far between.  As long as a car has LATCH anchors (they all do) it's fine.  Honestly, the only time I take the car seat out is to deep clean the interior of the car.  I can spend twenty minutes securing it in, and because I do it so infrequently, I really don't care.  Ease of attaching a LATCH anchor is NOT an influencing factor for me.  What IS an influencing factor (or rather, WAS) is if a rear-facing seat will fit in the back seat and still retain decent range of motion in the front seat.

Finally this: "...it doesn’t feel quite as granular as the CR-V does".

I looked this up and still can't figure out what is meant here. There is a modern usage where a boss might request "more granularity" (detail) in a report. Perhaps you mean finer detailing in the CR-V ? Here is a discussion on how the word is (mis)used to make people sound smarter when plain English will do just fine.

http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/53266/is-the-word-granular-a-synonym-for-the-word-specific

He means that the CR-V is the better driver's car.  It gives more feedback, and is more responsive to steering and throttle inputs.  This is not surprising, as Honda has always built driver's cars.

[sacrat]

"In the end, though, Brendan probably put it best: “The Rogue is a car I’d like to drive a long ways, and the CR-V is a car I’d like to own for a long time.”

What?!?. So the vehicle with less comfortable seats and serious design flaws in the infotainment is the one you want to own longer? The only serious flaw mentioned in the Rogue is installing the Child Seat which may or may not be an issue depending if other car seats work better. It likely can be overcome. The useless infotainment system is forever.

Less comfortable seats and flawed infotainment notwithstanding, the CRV is still a nice vehicle and I'm sure would be plenty satisfactory on the highway.  I think that was Brendan's nod to the longevity of most Hondas.  If you buy a Honda, you'll be able to keep it for 20 problem free years, that's the kinda thing he was talking about. 

Oh, and as far as child seats are concerned, the numbers of times I take them out and put them back in is few and far between.  As long as a car has LATCH anchors (they all do) it's fine.  Honestly, the only time I take the car seat out is to deep clean the interior of the car.  I can spend twenty minutes securing it in, and because I do it so infrequently, I really don't care.  Ease of attaching a LATCH anchor is NOT an influencing factor for me.  What IS an influencing factor (or rather, WAS) is if a rear-facing seat will fit in the back seat and still retain decent range of motion in the front seat.

Finally this: "...it doesn’t feel quite as granular as the CR-V does".

I looked this up and still can't figure out what is meant here. There is a modern usage where a boss might request "more granularity" (detail) in a report. Perhaps you mean finer detailing in the CR-V ? Here is a discussion on how the word is (mis)used to make people sound smarter when plain English will do just fine.

http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/53266/is-the-word-granular-a-synonym-for-the-word-specific

He means that the CR-V is the better driver's car.  It gives more feedback, and is more responsive to steering and throttle inputs.  This is not surprising, as Honda has always built driver's cars.

I agree with your comment on child seats staying put once they are installed, although some families needs may require them to be removed and reinstalled more often.

If he meant "the CR-V is the better driver's car" then why not just say that (plain English). I still can't find a definition of "granular" that makes sense in this context. If he meant "Built like granite" (solid, cohesive) it might make more sense, but that's a different word. I'm a bus driver, not a business major, so maybe this word is normal usage amongst that group, but it just doesn't seem to fit in an article aimed at a general audience.

[Snowman]

In this segment I have driven most last year and the closest thing to a "drivers" version was the Tiguan.

[sacrat]

In this segment I have driven most last year and the closest thing to a "drivers" version was the Tiguan.

The Tiguan is probably a good choice for empty nesters who just need a little extra space for getaways, but it's pretty limited for general family use.

[Brendan McAleer]

I find it problematic (at best) to include resale in a comparison test like this. Most families are shopping on a budget and are only concerned with current outlay. Perhaps residual value will matter if you are leasing, but may be offset in this case by Nissan's more aggressive discounts in addition to it's better initial value. With this many unknown factors, I believe that resale is best just left out of the equation. I was bemused when after the Rogue smoked the CR-V in value, you compared other trims to see if it got better (It didn't).

I disagree, resale is absolutely a factor shoppers mention, and a major impetus for Toyota and Honda sales. And I don't know why you'd be bemused that I'd compare other trims in a comparison test - these two are top-tier, and I wanted to look at how the volume-sellers stacked up.

"In the end, though, Brendan probably put it best: “The Rogue is a car I’d like to drive a long ways, and the CR-V is a car I’d like to own for a long time.”

What?!?. So the vehicle with less comfortable seats and serious design flaws in the infotainment is the one you want to own longer?

Pointing out historical resale and reliability here.

Given the above, the outcome seems contrived. On paper and on the road, the Rogue appears to be the clear winner.

There's no clear winner, that's the point. Stand by the CR-V as a pick for better all-rounder, but you have to drive both if you're shopping, and both are great choices.

[Snowman]

In this segment I have driven most last year and the closest thing to a "drivers" version was the Tiguan.

The Tiguan is probably a good choice for empty nesters who just need a little extra space for getaways, but it's pretty limited for general family use.

Or a twentysomthing that just graduated university and punted her Toyota to the curb and said thanks but enough 

[bombastic]

Nissan Rogue for me please, hit all the right spots for family hauler. Honda is just not right.....

[hoss]

The CRV seats are kind of a love hate relationship with my butt.  When we drove ours to BC (from Ont.) I would get in the car every morning and think these seats are not comfortable and every night after hours of driving I would think "man I really like those seats" . They are easy on myback for long distances.

I wonder if people who comment on the AWD drive system in the CRV, have actually drove one in the winter or have simply watched UTube videos.  I would very much like to see a winter driving comparison between some on the small SUVs, so there could be some real world testing not staged events like inclined rollers (in my 45 years of driving I have never seen one of those on the road).  After driving the CRV this winter in a fairly snowy winter in rural Ontario I was impressed by it's handling.

I glad the steering wheel was mentioned, the wheel, wheel comtrols and gauge cluster in one area were Honda nailed it, they and many storage bins are the highlights of the CRVs interior.

[sacrat]

In this segment I have driven most last year and the closest thing to a "drivers" version was the Tiguan.

The Tiguan is probably a good choice for empty nesters who just need a little extra space for getaways, but it's pretty limited for general family use.

Or a twentysomthing that just graduated university and punted her Toyota to the curb and said thanks but enough 

Agreed. Just not a family vehicle for 2-3 kids

[CanuckS2K]

I totally agree on Honda's infotainment.  My wife's Civic EX-L is absolutely horrible.  Easily the least intuitive system I've ever used.  Thankfully I hardly ever drive it because it would frustrate the living sh!t out of me.  I wasn't a fan of the previous gen Rogue whatsoever, but I'm really liking this one.  People must like it as well as I see a ton of them on the roads around here. 

[sacrat]

I find it problematic (at best) to include resale in a comparison test like this. Most families are shopping on a budget and are only concerned with current outlay. Perhaps residual value will matter if you are leasing, but may be offset in this case by Nissan's more aggressive discounts in addition to it's better initial value. With this many unknown factors, I believe that resale is best just left out of the equation. I was bemused when after the Rogue smoked the CR-V in value, you compared other trims to see if it got better (It didn't).

I disagree, resale is absolutely a factor shoppers mention, and a major impetus for Toyota and Honda sales.

I didn't say it's not a factor. I said it's too hard to quantify when combined with a value equation, and something changeable like rebates to be useful in a comparison test.

 And I don't know why you'd be bemused that I'd compare other trims in a comparison test - these two are top-tier, and I wanted to look at how the volume-sellers stacked up.

Fair enough. It "felt" like you guys were looking for a way to redeem the CR-V, but I just got that part wrong

Finally I'd still like to hear from Dan about what is meant by "granular" in this context. I'm assuming I'm not the only one who hasn't seen it used this way. Not criticizing...just curious