Engine & Gearbox Honda CR-V EX 2.0 Petrol

Discussion in '4th Generation (2013-2017)' started by tightgit, Sunday 16th Feb, 2014.

  1. tightgit Junior Member ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

    I’m thinking of changing our 3rd gen diesel to a 4th gen 2.0 petrol manual because of the low amount of annual mileage my wife does, about 4-5k. I like the diesel engine, it is a peach but can’t really justify it on the additional cost and low annual mileage.

    Has anyone heregot a petrol ? If so what are they like in day to day use and motorway driving?

    I will betest driving one but would appreciate the input of anyone who has the experience of the petrol engine.
     
  2. TheDarkKnight Expert Advisor ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

    2,688
    492
    I test drove the 2.0 litre petrol before buying the diesel - a bit lethargic and not as torquey either.

    But if its low annual mileage and not much motorway use, I suspect it wouldn't be a bad engine to live with. I drove the 2.4 petrol in the USA, which isnt available here, and that was a fantastic engine to be honestt. Just a shame its not an option here.
     
    Loading...
  3. Flying Tiger New Member Getting Started

    I've been running my 4th Generation. 2.0 petrol for 12 months and approx. 4k miles. Like you I liked the diesel version but could not justify additional cost given low annual mileage, etc. Another consideration was potential DPF problems arising from low usage. I would estimate that 90% of my mileage is local (short distance)/non-motorway and I've been very pleased with the driving experience on such journeys. For me, the 2.0 petrol also performs perfectly well on motorways - but my driving style is pretty relaxed these days so people with a heavier right foot might have a different view. If I was to be super critical, I would agree with previous comment about lack of torque compared to diesel. My previous car was a Ford 2.0 turbo diesel which, when motorway cruising, would happily accelerate for overtaking in top (5th) gear. The current CR-V is quite different in that in 6th (and sometimes 5th) I find that I need to drop down a gear for a quick overtaking manoeuvre. I can't comment on how the diesel CR-V would perform in this situation. With the 90/10 mix of short and long journeys that I make, I get a fraction over 35 MPG. Incidentally, the 4k miles covered so far have been totally trouble free.
     
  4. TheDarkKnight Expert Advisor ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

    2,688
    492
    As mine is a manual, depending on the speed, the CR-V shifts in either 5th or 6th.

    This is where the torque boost has a real advantage - granted, its not "break-yer-neck" speed, but considering the bulk of the vehicle, the CR-V is no slouch at all.
     
    Loading...
  5. tomwillie Valued Contributor ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆

    England Tom Royston
    439
    165
    We have been running a manual 2.0EXi Petrol CR-V since Nov 2012 & it goes OK fully loaded up with luggage for two dogs & two people, just needs a bit or rowing along from time to time but gears & clutch are light so no problem. That said I do prefer driving my 2.4EXi manual Accord but we have petrol cars due to low annual mileages of 6000k for CR-V & 3000k for Accord, the cars do regular 10/15 mile journeys but not every day as retired. Diesels can suffer not only from problems with DPF if regularly used on short journeys & also Dual Mass Flywheels and Clutches failing due to diesel torque, problems with Exhaust Re-circulation Valves & replacement diesel fuel pumps cost a small fortune. The 2.4i is a wonderful engine, its a pity it is not available in the CR-V in UK as the latter 2.4i direct injection is in USA. I believe the 2.0 auto CR-V is bit of a slow coach but have never driven one.
     
    Loading...
  6. FirstHonda Premium Member Club Supporter

    @tightgit I think you've just got to drive one and see what you think.

    I've just chosen a 2.0litre petrol/ auto as my annual mileage doesn't justify a diesel (and I don't want DPF issues from lots of short journeys) and I can't drive manual. The official figures give it a 0-62 time of about 12 seconds, vs about 10 seconds for the manual.

    If you are (no offence intended!) the sort of driver who drives everywhere with your foot to the floor, and accelerates hard at every opportunity I'd say that it probably won't be for you. If you are a calmer, smoother type of driver then you, like me, will probably find it ideal.

    With the "econ" button on the throttle response is dampened, but so far I've hardly found a reason to turn it off other than curiosity - it builds speed without issue, and maintains speed without a problem on the motorway. It certainly doesn't have the torque that my Accord 2.2 I-DTEC had, but I hardly ever used it TBH as there are so few opportunities to drive faster these days, and I don't want to run the risk of speeding tickets :Wink:

    With the "econ" button off it kicks down readily and is actually a bit sharper and quicker than you might expect.

    I'd say understand what your requirements are, how you like to drive, and then drive one on a mixture of roads. The automatic will take a further edge off performance I guess, too - although I find that fewer and fewer people actually understand how to drive an automatic transmission effectively.
     
    Loading...