General 2015 HR-V review (What Car?)

Discussion in '2nd Generation (2015)' started by FirstHonda, Monday 13th Jul, 2015.

  1. FirstHonda Premium Member Club Supporter

    Honda HR V Crossover Review | What Car?

    How nice to read that, even after all these years, the reviewers still haven't learned how to drive a car with a CVT gearbox...!

    What Car? - this isn't that tricky. The gearbox causes the engine to stay at higher revs if you keep the accelerator pedal buried in the carpet. Accelerate gradually, and you'll find a CVT pretty smooth.

    Got that? For the love of God, these guys are supposed to be professionals...:Ermm:

    Rest of the review is pretty standard fare. The HR-V doesn't seem to have an Audi badge on the grille, that sort of thing. Interesting to also see that they feel it is "quite expensive." I'd say that considering the standard equipment levels, it represents pretty good value when compared to a BMW X1 or Audi Q3, but what do I know?

    I'd say the Autocar review on the other thread is more balanced, albeit with the same failings regarding driving a car with a CVT. Looking at one of the Lexus forums, their frustrations at the continued ignorance of motoring journalists is pretty similar.
    Sprockutt and Ichiban like this.
  2. Ichiban Founder Staff Team

    England CJ Leeds
    Some one perhaps needs to tell them what CVT really stands for and how it works.
  3. Cobh Club Member ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

    HJ wrote a more intelligent piece, including what I think is a bash at What Car and their ilk "And as long as you don’t plant your foot into the floor on hills like a nutter, it does the job very well. We were pleasantly surprised by this version and, at £780 less than the SE diesel, I think it will probably be the top seller." Honda HR-V 2015 Range Road Test | Road Tests | Honest John
    FirstHonda likes this.
  4. FirstHonda Premium Member Club Supporter

    That is much more sensible. It's like he actually drove the cars like a normal human being! Quite reassuring...clearly not all motoring journalists are the same.
  5. nsxer Valued Contributor ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆

    i would say in order to get the best value for money if buying a diesel when you factor in the higher maintenance costs you need to be doing more than 10k per annum ... at least 16k would be more realistic

    not a bad review, just disappointed with the performance of the 1.5 engine ... albeit we all know that Honda engines need quite a few miles on em to get the best out of them
  6. FirstHonda Premium Member Club Supporter

    The new issue (October 2015) of What Car? has a three car test, the Nissan Qashqai vs Maxda CX-3 vs Honda HR-V (all 2WD diesel manual).

    The Nissan wins with 5 stars (out of 5) with the Honda second (4*) and the Mazda third (3*).

    Broadly, the Honda is the most practical and is praised for its "classy and well put together" interior, but loses out as it is the most expensive (before discounts) with a noisy engine and poor ride.

    The Nissan wins because it is more refined and with a "classier" interior, as well as being cheaper to buy and run.

    The Mazda came third by quite some distance, with them saying it is "hard(er) to recommend."
  7. i-DSI Expert Advisor ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

    Belgium Aalst
    I drove the CX-3, both in 2.0 petrol and in 1.5 diesel at launch in Belgium. I can confirm it's a damn good car! Especially in 2.0 petrol. Great engine. They don't downsize like the Ford EcoshXt or Renault-alikes. Feeling of quality is there, just like they continuously say about Audi and others east from Belgium. Also like the look, just like the HR-V is a beautiful design.
    Never drove a Nissan, can't comment.