2017 Honda CR-V Turbo and 7seats

[Egan101]

I've timed my CRV gas. Almost 12 sec to 100.

CVTs stay in the powerband so they accelerate quickly. But you can't overcome 1500 kg with a relatively underpowered (154 hp only) engine.

My Civic is 250 kg lighter so it has much better power-to-weight ratio and does 100 kph in about 10.5 sec. I don't have a video of the CRV but here's the Civic which is definitely much faster than the CRV.

2017 Honda Civic 1.8E CVT 0-100 kph - YouTube

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

For my FXT, it was around 7+ seconds when I tried to do a 0-100 (from a full stop and just floored the gas pedal). It took around 3+ seconds to reach 60 kmh. However, there is really no sensation of the vehicle moving up the gears.

For my Fiesta Ecoboost, it is around 10 seconds with the stock Optimo tires. I got better grip with the Accelera Alpha tires so it improved a few ticks but still over 9 seconds.

My usual way of checking acceleration is thru the toll booth of SLEX specially the southbound toll booth at Nichols. You need to make a full stop at the toll booth arm and once it raises up, I just floor it and reach 100 kmh the fastest way I can (assuming the road in front of me is clear).

[BlancNoir]

For my FXT, it was around 7+ seconds when I tried to do a 0-100 (from a full stop and just floored the gas pedal). It took around 3+ seconds to reach 60 kmh. However, there is really no sensation of the vehicle moving up the gears.

For my Fiesta Ecoboost, it is around 10 seconds with the stock Optimo tires. I got better grip with the Accelera Alpha tires so it improved a few ticks but still over 9 seconds.

My usual way of checking acceleration is thru the toll booth of SLEX specially the southbound toll booth at Nichols. You need to make a full stop at the toll booth arm and once it raises up, I just floor it and reach 100 kmh the fastest way I can (assuming the road in front of me is clear).

Crazy quick for a 1.5+ tonne SUV. hehe

You should have tried the SH9 with 4AT.

BTT: There's no point in racing the CR-V since it's not performance oriented but it is nice to know the 0 to 100 kph time. The petrol is decent but the diesel is anemic. But hey, it's got 300 Nm to play with.

[Egan101]

Crazy quick for a 1.5+ tonne SUV. hehe

You should have tried the SH9 with 4AT.

BTT: There's no point in racing the CR-V since it's not performance oriented but it is nice to know the 0 to 100 kph time. The petrol is decent but the diesel is anemic. But hey, it's got 300 Nm to play with.

Honda should have brought the CRV 1.5L turbo gas out here. It may not be something like the FXT but its 190hp/240Nm output is a lot better compared to the 2.0L and 2.4L NA engines.

[Archerfish]

Try to test it from a full stop to check how it performs a 0-100 kmh sprint. I am not sure how intelligent the CVT of Honda if you try to do a brake launch. For Subaru turbo cars with CVT, they try to do it by holding on to the brakes, rev the engine to turbo spool rpm (2500 rpm), letting go of the brakes, and then flooring to 6k rpm. I have not tried it though.

I remember back in Subic, *jut703 told me to depress the brake pedal then rev the engine up to 2000 or more. However after a few seconds, the engine goes back to its idle RPM at about 800-900.

Someone told me from OVT that I can actually launch the car if I time it right. That is, I have to make sure that I don't go past 5 seconds or else I won't be able to launch the car.

[BlancNoir]

Honda should have brought the CRV 1.5L turbo gas out here. It may not be something like the FXT but its 190hp/240Nm output is a lot better compared to the 2.0L and 2.4L NA engines.

Ah yes. They should have.

At least their turbo 1.5L is comparable to some 2.5L NA engines.

Mello Mazda! and Toyota!

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[Egan101]

If you want a quick Honda for less than 2M, your only options are a Civic 1.5L Turbo and the Accord 2.4L. Both have CVT trannies. The Civic RS can do 0-100kmh in around 7 seconds while the Accord 2.4L can do it in around 8 seconds. If you want something like 6 seconds or below, then you may need the Accord 3.5L V6 or the Civic Type R.

[BlancNoir]

If you want a quick Honda for less than 2M, your only options are a Civic 1.5L Turbo and the Accord 2.4L. Both have CVT trannies. The Civic RS can do 0-100kmh in around 7 seconds while the Accord 2.4L can do it in around 8 seconds. If you want something like 6 seconds or below, then you may need the Accord 3.5L V6 or the Civic Type R.

True! Besides, sub 8 second 0 to 100 kmh is sports car territory already. So, we really are getting our money's worth (sort of) with the aforementioned cars.

[Egan101]

True! Besides, sub 8 second 0 to 100 kmh is sports car territory already. So, we really are getting our money's worth (sort of) with the aforementioned cars.

7-8 seconds on a 0 to 100 kmh sprint is still something more of an enjoyable daily driver like a Civic RS, Focus Ecoboost, Mazda3 2.0L, Mazda6, Accord 2.4L, FXT, or CX5 AWD.

It's those capable of 6 seconds or below that gets something more exciting. Most of these rides are above 2M already and only the WRX could be had for just below 2M.

The standard for supercars and ubersedans nowadays is 3 seconds for a 0-60 mph sprint.

[jut703]

Crazy quick for a 1.5+ tonne SUV. hehe

You should have tried the SH9 with 4AT.

BTT: There's no point in racing the CR-V since it's not performance oriented but it is nice to know the 0 to 100 kph time. The petrol is decent but the diesel is anemic. But hey, it's got 300 Nm to play with.

Same lang halos ang 0-100 ng diesel and gas. 11+ sec din yung diesel. More torque so it feels faster than the gas.

The gas needs to rev to 4k rpm just to get good pace when fully loaded with 5 on board. Ramdam na ramdam yung bigat. A torquey diesel doesn't have the same problem. Turbo lag is also minimized because of the 9-speed AT.

It's just that the diesel doesn't reach 200 while the gas does. But I don't think people buy the CRV for high-speed performance so the quickness of the diesel off the line will be more appreciated.

So I think the diesel is really a better buy overall - better resale, better low-end performance, better efficiency.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[3GEMS]

Same lang halos ang 0-100 ng diesel and gas. 11+ sec din yung diesel. More torque so it feels faster than the gas.

The gas needs to rev to 4k rpm just to get good pace when fully loaded with 5 on board. Ramdam na ramdam yung bigat. A torquey diesel doesn't have the same problem. Turbo lag is also minimized because of the 9-speed AT.

It's just that the diesel doesn't reach 200 while the gas does. But I don't think people buy the CRV for high-speed performance so the quickness of the diesel off the line will be more appreciated.

So I think the diesel is really a better buy overall - better resale, better low-end performance, better efficiency.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Hindi ba if you have more gears mas prone sa turbo lag kasi andun lagi rpm sa baba because more gears to upshift.

Well may advantage talaga diesel lalot sa SUV mabibigat na sasakyan.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk