![]() 09/30/2014 at 14:44 • Filed to: None | ![]() | ![]() |
They updated the CR-V.
Still a weird looking crossover with a 185 horsepower N/A I4 mated to a CVT.
In other words, dear god so much beige.
Motor Trend makes it sound like it isn't terrible though, so that's good.
I can't even say what I'd rather have instead, because the crossover segment is a snooze-fest right now. Maybe a Journey?
![]() 09/30/2014 at 14:54 |
|
![]() 09/30/2014 at 14:55 |
|
I really find this whole stretched light thing ugly. Why do they need to touch the roof?
Unless it's on the Escalade because it's so obnoxious and matches the SUV's personality.
![]() 09/30/2014 at 15:01 |
|
Actually my point is that the XC60 is better; but you bring up a good point and question.
![]() 09/30/2014 at 15:04 |
|
It goes without saying the XC60 is better.
![]() 09/30/2014 at 15:04 |
|
Cx-5.
![]() 09/30/2014 at 15:05 |
|
Needs moar power.
Actually, that's probably what I'd get. And I'd probably get a 6 if we were talking about sedans.
![]() 09/30/2014 at 15:09 |
|
We have a CX-5 GT with the 2.5, and it's not as anemic as you'd assume. We've had it for over a year and it's been great. And my parents have a Grand Touring Mazda6, and it's phenomenal as well. The looks are way above it's price point. And where I'm at, you can lease a Mazda6 sport for $259/mo.
On a side note, we did look at the CR-V (for about 5 minutes) before we bought the CX-5 and it is god awful boring. The Rav4 is a little better, but not much.
![]() 09/30/2014 at 15:13 |
|
so you can still see the tail lights, even if you're driving with the tail gate open
![]() 09/30/2014 at 15:43 |
|
I would personally take a CR-V over a Rav-4 if those were the only cars I could choose from. I find the Rav-4 styling just hideous. Not saying the CR-V is that much better but the lesser of the two evils
![]() 09/30/2014 at 17:52 |
|
Manual Tiguan?