WVCR-V

Like many of us, I purchased my first ever S2000 earlier this year after wanting one forever. Before that I had been (and still am) daily driving my 2004 Honda CR-V with a 5sp manual. Over the last several years i have looked at and considered many a sporty compromise to replace the CR-V. WRX's, Civic Si, etc. Every time I drove something else I came away knowing I should just keep the CR-V. It has a much better manual transmission than all but the newest generation WRX's and a with a civic, I would give up the hauling space and all wheel drive. Plus I figure the CR-V is more reliable than the WRX as well. Mine currently has 133k miles and has had virtually no problems. My mother had a 2008 CR-V untill recently trading for a Mazda CX5 and she and I agree my CR-V is better than the 2008 CR-V as far as build quality and driving fun.

With all of the extreme SUV's like the BMW X5 and the Porsche Ceyanne, why couldn't Honda have made a CR-V like my 2nd gen with the Accord v6 and a 6 spd manual. A bit lower, sportier suspension and some decent tire set up? Mine has 205/70 15's for crying out loud...lol. I mean, its the perfect automobile bodywise, short, manuverable, spacious. Its amazing what you can haul in that thing. With the simple, powerful Honda v6 and great as always Honda gearshift, it could be better than a WRX in every way. So is that too much to ask?

rob-2

Because you probably want it cheap too. Honda sells boring and reliable people movers, that's their business model.

darcyw

yes. yes it is. what you ask makes too much sense.

darcy

Saki GT

Go look at Mazdas - sporty fun Japanese cars, like Honda used to have.

CMK

The way the industry is going, they would sell approximately sixteen of what you are suggesting.

I could see a case made for a sporty version of the new CR-V with the turbo motor, but a manual transmission? I'm a member of the cult of the manual myself, but there's no way that'll happen.

WolfpackS2k

Interesting observation, as it seems the motoring press is almost unanimous in their opinion that the CX5 is the best handling and most "fun" affordable CUV available on the market. I'm pretty sure it's been described as having superior handling to a few sedans even.

Kenny_Stang

Agreed, we just picked up a 2016 Mazda CX-5 after considering most other SUV/CUV in the market, and it was by far the best handling (and extremely well equipped, even for the base "Sport" model). The only negative really, is that it only comes with a manual transmission in the 2.0L model. Looked at both the CR-V and the HR-V, but CVT they come with immediately ruled them out, and their styling and handling was not as nice as the CX-5. Hate the CVT, even if it makes more economical sense.

vader1

Yup.

CosmosMpower

Because honda is boring

WVCR-V

Sorry for the confusion. I edited my post to clarify that my I feel my 2004 CR-V is nicer than the 2008 CR-V, not the CX-5. Actually the CX-5 is the grand touring model and its actually much closer to what I would want than my 2004 CR-V. The CX-5 handles well and is fun to drive for an SUV. Add a turbo or v6 and I could even live with the auto gearbox on it. No suspension tweaks really needed to satisfy my description of what I wanted my CR-V to be like. My statement was poorly written.