CR-V engine problems

[MrH]

Couldn't they improve numbers by simply swapping in a super tall final drive and programming the transmission for miserly driving?

No, not really.  It's a lot more complicated than that.  Super tall gearing only helps if you make power at that RPM and can do it efficiently.

[12,000 RPM]

In real life.... EPA tests are a whole different kettle of fish

I still think the hybrid version would have been the better range topper, with a mega detuned 2.0T in a distant second

[Morris Minor]

I made contact with Service Manager at the place we bought the CR-V from, nice guy, - emailed him my documentation of the problem: the photo above, the oil analysis result, etc.

The rep from Honda happens to be visiting the dealer today so the issue will be raised with her.
Maybe I'll get an answer to "What can Honda do about it?"

[Morris Minor]

Well. No luck there, since my car is not on the list. Guessing because I live in a sunbelt state..
So, on the service manager's recommendation, I've opened a case with American Honda.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Drive it into a lake.

[shp4man]

Well. No luck there, since my car is not on the list. Guessing because I live in a sunbelt state..
So, on the service manager's recommendation, I've opened a case with American Honda.

I don't know about Georgia, but here in CA, more than three failed repair attempts on the same problem is grounds for a buy-back. Be aware, though, it's a "deal", like any other car deal. They want you to basically trade it in on a new car- value is negotiable.

[Morris Minor]

My need is for a modern, reliable, compact-medium SUV. My goal was to buy new and keep it 10 years. The CR-V was an easy win on paper, but i remember making a decision to set aside my prejudice against the new practice of using small turbos in biggish vehicles.

So far I think my prejudice is well-founded.

[GoCougs]

Your prejudice is very well founded.

There's a reason why the best automaker in the world (Toyota) has skipped the turbo fad.

[MX793]

Your prejudice is very well founded.

There's a reason why the best automaker in the world (Toyota) has skipped the turbo fad.

Not sure if they "skipped" it, or if they are just really slow to adopt.  Remember that Toyota was also the last to abandon cassette players and I'm pretty sure the Corolla was the last vehicle in its class to abandon the once ubiquitous 4-speed auto in favor of either CVT or something with a higher gear count.  Outside of the Prius and hybrid drivetrain tech, Toyota is not a company I would consider to have been, historically, on the cutting edge of car tech.

[r0tor]

Your prejudice is very well founded.

There's a reason why the best automaker in the world (Toyota) has skipped the turbo fad.

They are so good they need other companies to design cars for them...

[FoMoJo]

My need is for a modern, reliable, compact-medium SUV. My goal was to buy new and keep it 10 years. The CR-V was an easy win on paper, but i remember making a decision to set aside my prejudice against the new practice of using small turbos in biggish vehicles.

So far I think my prejudice is well-founded.

Small displacement turbo engines work well in just about ever other application.  Honda may have aimed a bit too high in order to achieve maximum efficiency.  Even the best manufacturers have their lemons.

[GoCougs]

Not sure if they "skipped" it, or if they are just really slow to adopt.  Remember that Toyota was also the last to abandon cassette players and I'm pretty sure the Corolla was the last vehicle in its class to abandon the once ubiquitous 4-speed auto in favor of either CVT or something with a higher gear count.  Outside of the Prius and hybrid drivetrain tech, Toyota is not a company I would consider to have been, historically, on the cutting edge of car tech.

I don't think the analogy quite holds. But would your rather have a Ford Focus w/DCT, Nissan Versa w/CVT or a Corolla w/4sp AT? Innovation isn't always what is new/fancy/whatever. Also, Toyota changed the world of manufacturing (Toyota Production System) which is one of the most impactful innovations in modern industrial history.

Turbos have been around for decades, and the advantages, esp. for plebeian vehicles, has always been dubious, as we see ITT, Ford Ecoboost, etc., plus Toyota is no stranger to turbos having had many many Turbo models in the past (Supra, MR-2, many JDM models) and plus one of the most legendary turbo motors of all time, the 2JZ.

If Toyota returns to the turbo path, if history is any indicator, it will be the best implementation (at least from a reliability and mpg POV). They're not there yet because they're still working on cracking the code and actually making turbos a unquestionably better value proposition for plebeian vehicles.

[2o6]

You can't take your lone experience and apply it to literally every vehicle ever, even those with the same exact engine. Anecdotes aren't statistics.


Its also very possible that maybe you just got a lemon, which sometimes just happens with literally every manufacturer, even the ones with strong reputations.


FWIW I've got several friends with cars that have that 1.5T and they haven't had any issues. Even asked my Honda tech friend, and he says he's not really seen any oil dillusion cases, even though there is a service bulletin for it.

[2o6]

But also, I think it's time we admit that maybe Japanese chefs also tend to have design and manufacturing issues.

Just from my experience from working on cars, buying and selling shit, Toyota vehicles and Honda cars have issues:

2006-2008 Honda Civic R18 blocks are literally casted wrong and will likely crack engine blocks for no reason at all

The 2AZFE that Toyota used for basically all its FWD cars from 2002-2010 is notorious for having mediocre rod bearings, and having head gasket and oil consumption issues

the 1ZZFE from the 1998-2006 corolla is also notoriously an oil burner

Mazda's 2.3L MZR motor is known to be crap

L15 2009+ Honda fits have issues with popping out spark plugs occasionally, and the whole has to be helicoiled or possibly the entire head needs to be replaced


I'm not saying that everything is totally equal and that "well, Euro cars are just as reliable!" But i think we should drop the notion that Japanese = never breaks ever, when that's never been true, and arguably they're the worst about getting to admit issues with their product.

[FoMoJo]

Yes, Japanese tiny little econoboxes were more reliable than those made by domestic manufacturers who were producing compromised crap cars into the '90s.  That is no longer true. 

[2o6]

Yes, Japanese tiny little econoboxes were more reliable than those made by domestic manufacturers who were producing compromised crap cars into the '90s.  That is no longer true.

No, I think they're definitely less problematic than American and European cars, I'm just saying that they've literally always had their issues, both then and now.

[BimmerM3]

Not sure if they "skipped" it, or if they are just really slow to adopt.  Remember that Toyota was also the last to abandon cassette players and I'm pretty sure the Corolla was the last vehicle in its class to abandon the once ubiquitous 4-speed auto in favor of either CVT or something with a higher gear count.  Outside of the Prius and hybrid drivetrain tech, Toyota is not a company I would consider to have been, historically, on the cutting edge of car tech.

I guess time will tell, though I think Toyota's reluctance to adopt new tech is a large part of their great reliability record - they make sure they get it right. It's definitely one of the reasons why Tacomas and 4Runners are so popular despite being on old platforms.

[BimmerM3]

No, I think they're definitely less problematic than American and European cars, I'm just saying that they've literally always had their issues, both then and now.

It seems like the gap has closed a bit though.

But yeah, AT Accords from the 98-02 era are another example.

[FoMoJo]

No, I think they're definitely less problematic than American and European cars, I'm just saying that they've literally always had their issues, both then and now.

I believe a lot of it is perception, a carry-over from when domestics were horrible.

[CaminoRacer]

I guess time will tell, though I think Toyota's reluctance to adopt new tech is a large part of their great reliability record - they make sure they get it right. It's definitely one of the reasons why Tacomas and 4Runners are so popular despite being on old platforms.

Yup

[12,000 RPM]

You can't take your lone experience and apply it to literally every vehicle ever, even those with the same exact engine. Anecdotes aren't statistics.


Its also very possible that maybe you just got a lemon, which sometimes just happens with literally every manufacturer, even the ones with strong reputations.


FWIW I've got several friends with cars that have that 1.5T and they haven't had any issues. Even asked my Honda tech friend, and he says he's not really seen any oil dillusion cases, even though there is a service bulletin for it.

I'd say it's widespread enough with the 1.5T that it can't be written off as anomalous. Honda issued a TSB after all.

I'm neutral on turbos. Maybe slightly negative. I don't plan on buying another one

[FoMoJo]

Small displacement turbos, much like hybrids, are an interim stage pending EVs, whether battery or hydrogen.  Driven sensibly, they do perform more efficiently with power on tap when needed.  Properly engineered, Ecoboost for example, perhaps Mercedes, are reliable with few quality issues.

[2o6]

I'd say it's widespread enough with the 1.5T that it can't be written off as anomalous. Honda issued a TSB after all.

I'm neutral on turbos. Maybe slightly negative. I don't plan on buying another one

Don't ever look at any GM or Ford service bulletins, then.



I think this forum's aversion towards turbos is weird, especially since back in like 2002 I'm sure F&F lancer evo crazy.


I've been pretty much pleased with my car, even if it's been kind of mediocre about quality.

[GoCougs]

Remember how hybrids were going to change the world? ~20 years on and the only hybrid worth mentioning is the Prius, and it's pretty much a sales curiosity, being WAY WAY outsold by the likes of the Rav-4, Corolla, Civic, Accord, etc. Same as it will be for EVs and hydrogen and my bet, turbos - interesting, but curiosities at best.

Turbos + gasoline will always be a recipe for poor(er) mpg and reliability due to the inherent science that underpins them; mainly, that turbo motors have to run a lower compression ratio (and of course that the turbo adds a bunch of stuff, particularly the turbo, which is baked in super high temps).

[FoMoJo]

Remember how hybrids were going to change the world? ~20 years on and the only hybrid worth mentioning is the Prius, and it's pretty much a sales curiosity, being WAY WAY outsold by the likes of the Rav-4, Corolla, Civic, Accord, etc. Same as it will be for EVs and hydrogen and my bet, turbos - interesting, but curiosities at best.

Turbos + gasoline will always be a recipe for poor(er) mpg and reliability due to the inherent science that underpins them; mainly, that turbo motors have to run a lower compression ratio (and of course that the turbo adds a bunch of stuff, particularly the turbo, which is baked in super high temps).

Bear in mind that hybrids are still around in various forms.  That Ecoboost tech was chosen as a better (more financially feasible) option to serve as an interim technology until battery technology/fuel cell development and infrastructure was advanced to a degree whereby it supersedes all forms of anything requiring an I/C engine.

That is the future.

[GoCougs]

Bear in mind that hybrids are still around in various forms.  That Ecoboost tech was chosen as a better (more financially feasible) option to serve as an interim technology until battery technology/fuel cell development and infrastructure was advanced to a degree whereby it supersedes all forms of anything requiring an I/C engine.

That is the future.

True, hybrids exist in silence. For example, and USDM Audi A6 will have a mild hybrid powertrain. But then again that is for addressing acceleration, turbo lag and turbo MPG issues with jackrabbit starts (i.e., normal driving).

Ford made no such conscious choice regarding Ecoboost since Ford has zero sustained investment in EVs (there's the Focus Electric, but Ford sold all of ~500 in 2018). Ford just announced yesterday that it is "partnering" with VW for future EV tech - which means it will use VW tech because it has none of its own that can compete.

EVs, hydrogen, etc., are not the future, unless fascist immoral government action makes it so, which nobody wants of course. No, that boring ass stripper Corolla or Camry or Rav4 is the future of environmnetal sustainability and frugality, if people really cared about such things (which they don't, obviously).

[FoMoJo]

True, hybrids exist in silence. For example, and USDM Audi A6 will have a mild hybrid powertrain. But then again that is for addressing acceleration, turbo lag and turbo MPG issues with jackrabbit starts (i.e., normal driving).

Ford made no such conscious choice regarding Ecoboost since Ford has zero sustained investment in EVs (there's the Focus Electric, but Ford sold all of ~500 in 2018). Ford just announced yesterday that it is "partnering" with VW for future EV tech - which means it will use VW tech because it has none of its own that can compete.

EVs, hydrogen, etc., are not the future, unless fascist immoral government action makes it so, which nobody wants of course. No, that boring ass stripper Corolla or Camry or Rav4 is the future of environmnetal sustainability and frugality, if people really cared about such things (which they don't, obviously).

You, obviously, haven't been following the automotive technology trends over the past few years.

Ford determinately chose the path of small displacement turbo engines a dozen or so years ago as a way of meeting efficiency standards rather than going the more expensive way of hybrids and diesel.  When it was proven that it was successful, the other major brands fell in line, hence the proliferation of small displacement turbo engines all over the place.  Of course, some went the 'displacement-on-demand' route, which was a folly to begin with.

The next stage is now here though, EVs, whether rechargeable battery or fuel cell.  Obviously, rechargeable batteries will be either an interim until fuel cells are more feasible or they will advance in parallel.

[GoCougs]

You, obviously, haven't been following the automotive technology trends over the past few years.

Ford determinately chose the path of small displacement turbo engines a dozen or so years ago as a way of meeting efficiency standards rather than going the more expensive way of hybrids and diesel.  When it was proven that it was successful, the other major brands fell in line, hence the proliferation of small displacement turbo engines all over the place.  Of course, some went the 'displacement-on-demand' route, which was a folly to begin with.

The next stage is now here though, EVs, whether rechargeable battery or fuel cell.  Obviously, rechargeable batteries will be either an interim until fuel cells are more feasible or they will advance in parallel.

Ford chose Ecoboost, but not in lieu of instead of EVs, as you had claimed. Ford is way behind all other full-line automakers in EV tech (not that that's a bad thing really - EVs are a dog that don't hunt, but it matters from a political/PR POV, or, if fascist immoral law is enacted forcing the use of EVs).

Ecoboost was not so successful - lots of class-action lawsuits due to reliability and a moderate amount of bad PR due to real-world MPG not matching sticker rating. Ecoboost was also a factor in Ford dumping its cars - a 2.0 Eccoboost Taurus never should have happened. And Ford also chose to not use the upmarket 400-450 hp 3.5L Ecoboost in the F-Super Duty, choosing rather to take a page from GM's playbook and revert back to a pooprod gas V8.

[FoMoJo]

Ford chose Ecoboost, but not in lieu of instead of EVs, as you had claimed. Ford is way behind all other full-line automakers in EV tech (not that that's a bad thing really - EVs are a dog that don't hunt, but it matters from a political/PR POV, or, if fascist immoral law is enacted forcing the use of EVs).

Ecoboost was not so successful - lots of class-action lawsuits due to reliability and a moderate amount of bad PR due to real-world MPG not matching sticker rating. Ecoboost was also a factor in Ford dumping its cars - a 2.0 Eccoboost Taurus never should have happened. And Ford also chose to not use the upmarket 400-450 hp 3.5L Ecoboost in the F-Super Duty, choosing rather to take a page from GM's playbook and revert back to a pooprod gas V8.

Ford went with Ecoboost because batteries were, as then, not developed to a realistic level for general vehicle use; other than shorts trips to work and back, or to the mall.  A dozen years have shown a significant level of improvement, so now is the time to get serious hence the deal with VW.  Of course, the big enchilada is autonomous vehicles which Ford chose to invest in.

As for Godzilla, a good truck engine.

[veeman]

Regarding "fascist immoral law enacted forcing use of EVs".  Not commenting on the fascist or immoral aspect, but these laws are not going to go away and have already created the fertile soil for the future dominance of EV.  China and Western Europe have already enacted laws basically forcing EV adoption.  These laws will not change.