The first CR-V arrived in America nearly a decade ago, hot on the heels of the surprisingly successful Toyota RAV4. Both vehicles were designed for the Japanese consumer, and plans did not originally include offering them in the U.S. The CR-V also did very well. It lacked power, and its construction was a bit lightweight, but the combination of relatively car-like handling, a roomy and versatile interior, and a compact exterior found many takers.

For 2002, Honda introduced a second-generation CR-V with more power and a more solid structure. I found it impressive at the time, but dated compared to the then-new Hyundai Tucson and Kia Sportage a few years later.

For 2007, Honda has again redesigned the CR-V. Does the third-generation vehicle address my criticisms of the 2005? Does it measure up to the Toyota RAV4, which was redesigned last year and now offers a V6 and third-row seat as options? I took an all-wheel-drive CR-V EX for a test drive to find out.

Styling

Photos of the new CR-V began leaking onto the Internet a few months ago, and desk chair critics, myself among them, were not kind. The double-decker front end and downward swooping, car-like side window outline seemed loopy. Many asked, "What were they thinking?"

Well, in the metal the new CR-V looks much better than in those photos. The front end will take some getting used to, especially the "smile" formed by the headlights and lower grille. But it's distinctive and a vast improvement over the chunky, unresolved, overcladded front end of the second-generation CR-V. (I personally found the first gen CR-V much more attractive than the over-cladded under-tired second one. The rounded D-pillars were a slick detail.) And the raised trapezoid on the now upward-opening tailgate makes no sense to my eyes. But the BMW-like bodysides, complete with Banglesque flame surfacing, and that controversial window outline combine to yield an elegance you won't find elsewhere in this class. This new body sits lower over larger wheels, yielding a more confident yet thoroughly un-macho stance.

In short, the CR-V is the unHummer.

A noteworthy omission: the spare tire has moved from the liftgate to beneath the cargo floor. The current RAV4 retains the old setup.

The interior has been similarly transformed, with a more upscale design, tighter fits, and nicer materials than you'll find in any direct competitor. I especially like the padded, stitched armrests on the doors. The EX cloth is nice, the EX-L's leather even nicer. (Leather at intro: what an innovation!) Honda has used a variety of details, textures, and materials to keep things interesting.
The Koreans are once again a step behind, and the RAV4 also seems a bit plasticky in comparison. The Dodge Nitro, which I drove an hour earlier, was way behind, with scads of monotone hard plastic.

Sure, most of the materials in the CR-V are also hard plastic, but like those in the Accord they somehow avoid looking cheap or even just average. One possible exception: the foldaway tray table between the front seats. I'm a bit unclear on the purpose of this in the first, place, as the front seats are too close together to be able to walk between them. Not to mention the low roof. It might be time for a fixed console like the sylish one in the 2007 Element SC.

Off-topic: I've never found the Element attractive before, or even non-ugly. But the new SC trim, with a lowered sport suspension and attractive 18-inch alloys, looks surprisingly sharp.

Accommodations

I found the driving position of the 2005 dated and even "buslike." The 2007'S driving position is lower relative to the steering wheel, bringing it into line with the competition. You still sit much higher than in a car, affording excellent forward visibility. Visibility to the quarters is somewhat compromised by the new styling, but proper use of the large mirrors solves this potential problem.

The attractive front seats are comfortable, with a decent amount of lateral support in turns. That said, some people might find them too small. Adjustments remain manual, even in the EX-L. For power seats, it'll have to be the RDX. (Honda say Acura's new compact SUV shares about 10 percent of its parts with the new CR-V.) Unlike in the Dodge Nitro I drove an hour earlier, controls are well-designed and placed where they can easily be reached.

As before, the firm, reclinable rear seat is high enough off the floor to provide more thigh support than you'll find in 90 percent of the vehicles sold today. Rear passengers also get an armrest with cupholders.

Unlike in the RAV4 and upcoming redesigned Mitsubishi Outlander, no third-row seat is available. The third-row seats in the others are no doubt of very limited use, but it can be helpful to have such a seat in a pinch.

The rear seat continues to tumble forward to yield a low, flat load floor. Unlike in the PT Cruiser, which has rear seats that similarly tumble forward, the rear seats are not removable for even more cargo volume. Perhaps because of this design, the front passenger seat continues not to fold. One nifty new trick: the seatback is split 40:20:40, so only the center section need be folded to carry a few lengthy objects. Less nifty: a cargo shelf that's less adjustable and less sturdy than those you'll find elsewhere.

On the Road

The only engine remains a 2.4-liter four, now with ten more horsepower, for a Toyota four-cylinder-tying 166. Good refinement--for a four--but no thrills. As with the second-gen CR-V, the engine never feels strong, and performance is merely adequate. Many people are already calling for a V6, and I cannot disagree that one would be very welcome, especially in the EX and EX-L.

The "Real-Time" AWD system remains much the same as before. So nearly all of the time an AWD CR-V functions as a front-wheel-drive vehicle. Only when the front wheels slip is some torque directed to the rear wheels. Such a system most benefits low-speed traction. At higher speeds the system has virtually no impact on handling. In contrast, the SH-AWD system in the Acura RDX shifts torque front-to-rear and side-to-side to limit understeer.

The 2007 CR-V's handling is less tippy than the 2005's, but only enough to roughly tie the class leaders in these areas, not substantially surpass them. The steering, though accurate, is too light for my taste, and lacks the quickness you'll find in the Civic. Above all else, the CR-V in no way asks to be driven in a sporting manner.

In Sport V6 trim, the RAV4 feels much sportier. But it also feels a half-size larger and heavier, which can be good or bad depending on what you like. In comparison, the new CR-V has the smooth, precise, almost delicate feel typical of Honda's cars.

The third-gen CR-V's ride is smoother than the 2005's, and in general the suspension feels softer, but there's still a touch of the sort of jiggling that separates even good SUVs from cars. Noise levels are moderately low, especially at lower speeds. This should be a comfortable vehicle to take long trips in.

Overall, as in the past we've got a comfortable vehicle that neither excites nor upsets, just now with even more refinement.

2007 Honda CR-V Price Comparisons and Pricing

The 2007 is priced very close to the 2006. Adjusting for features actually suggests a small price cut.

Base trim to base trim, the CR-V is priced very close to the RAV4. But add AWD and option them up, and the CR-V enjoys an increasingly wide price advantage.

Even with its optional V6 a Kia Sportage is $1,500 to $2,100 less than the CR-V. Currently a rebate adds another $500 to the Korean SUV's price advantage.

Prices change frequently, and differences will vary based on feature level. To quickly generate these and other comparisons with the specific features you want, visit my Web site, www.truedelta.com. (It's the only site that provides true "apples-to-apples" price comparisons.)

TrueDelta's page for the Honda CR-V:

http://www.truedelta.com/models/CR-V.php

Last Words

The new CR-V isn't a thrill to drive, and generally won't appeal to enthusiasts. It's also a bit more expensive than the Koreans. But not everyone is into horsepower or getting the lowest possible price. Those seeking a versatile interior combined with elegant styling, a nicely furnished cabin, strong resale value, and an affordable price will find what they've been looking for.

A Note on 2007 Honda CR-V Reliability

I cannot practically cover reliability within the context of this review. However, many people are interested in such information, so I've started collecting my own data. Results, once they are available, will be posted to my site, www.truedelta.com, with updates every three months.

Unlike other sources, TrueDelta will clearly identify what difference it will make if you buy a CR-V rather than another vehicle by providing "times in the shop" and "days in the shop" stats (among others). You will be able to specify the number of years, annual miles, and types of repairs to include in 2007 Honda CR-V reliability comparisons.

Before I can report results, I need data on all cars--not just the CR-V--from people like you. To encourage participation, those who help provide the data will receive free access to the site's reliability information. Non-participants will have to pay an access fee.

For the details, and to sign up, visit www.truedelta.com.

A link to this website and alphabetized links to my other vehicle reviews can be found on my profile page.

Some of my reviews of related vehicles:
Acura RDX review
Chevrolet Equinox review
Ford Escape review
2005 Honda CR-V review
Hyundai Tucson review
Kia Sportage review
Saturn VUE review
Subaru Forester review
Suzuki Grand Vitara review
Toyota RAV4 review