Car Reviews

[Expatman]

I wonder why the Crosstar is so rarely included in comparative road reviews of small SUV's or Crossovers? Size, seating height, appearance etc. all match competitors so why do motoring magazines and reviewers all generally ignore the Crosstar?

[E27006]

I believe other car makers do not want their products being compared side-by-side in print with a car as advanced as the Honda, in any case the car magazines are so reliant on the makers for advertising copy etc,  the magazines reviews are not objective for fear of falling out with the car makers, note  how VW threatened media with cancelling advertising copy over reporting of dieselgate

[richardfrost]

Maybe it’s because the Crosstar is neither an SUV nor a crossover. It’s a Jazz jacked up by an inch.

[culzean]

Maybe it’s because the Crosstar is neither an SUV nor a crossover. It’s a Jazz jacked up by an inch.

Just like the original Qashqai was a Nissan Almera jacked up by a few inches 

[Expatman]

Maybe it’s because the Crosstar is neither an SUV nor a crossover. It’s a Jazz jacked up by an inch.

Just like the original Qashqai was a Nissan Almera jacked up by a few inches 

And the T-Cross is a Polo jacked up, the Ford Puma is a Fiesta jacked up and the Peugeot 2008 is a 208 jacked up etc. etc. It just depends how much cosmetic work is done but basically they are exactly the same as saying the Crosstar is a Jazz jacked up. richardfrost is right they are all jacked up versions of superminis but the differences made by cosmetics and jacking up are exactly what a lot of people want - an increased ride height and something that looks a bit more rugged.

[richardfrost]

No, really. A Ford Puma is a different car to the Fiesta. Sure it’s the same platform but it’s a different car, in the same way the HRV is built on the Jazz platform but is not a Jazz. The Crosstar is a Jazz on one inch stilts with a different trim level. It doesn’t fool anyone. I’m not knocking the car. I quite like it. But it’s not unsurprising that people don’t compare it with SUVs or crossovers. For that, Honda sell the HRV.

[peteo48]

Think that's spot on Richard. Seen a number of reviews indicating that the Crossstar is only worthwhile if you really need that extra bit of height. They also do say it rides speed bumps better.

[Kenneve]

I find that my Mk4 EX Jazz rides better than my previous Mk3.
Not really sure why, although its the first Jazz I've had, NOT running on Dunlop tyres.
This time I'm on Yokohama Bluearth tyres, maybe that the difference, I just don't know.

Anyway, I'm quite happy with the ride and with car generally, now I've figured out how to turn off all the 'gizmos', which were a real PITA and in my opinion quite dangerous in some situations, as described in other recent posts.

[Westy36]

I always see it as Streetwise to Rover 25, or Stepway to Sandero.

[Expatman]

No, really. A Ford Puma is a different car to the Fiesta. Sure it’s the same platform but it’s a different car, in the same way the HRV is built on the Jazz platform but is not a Jazz. The Crosstar is a Jazz on one inch stilts with a different trim level. It doesn’t fool anyone. I’m not knocking the car. I quite like it. But it’s not unsurprising that people don’t compare it with SUVs or crossovers. For that, Honda sell the HRV.

Good point, though I think Honda are aiming the Crosstar at a younger age group so a bit of SUV styling may help marketing. I like the Crosstar because of it’s raised height but am waiting to see and try the new HR-V before deciding. Launch news on the new HR-V is all very promising but it depends on pricing and actual road tests which way I jump.

[Bristol_Crosstar]

Maybe it’s because the Crosstar is neither an SUV nor a crossover. It’s a Jazz jacked up by an inch.

I don't think there's a strict definition for a crossover, I've always though it as a saloon styled to look like an SUV, nothing more than that.

[Expatman]

Isn’t the real attraction of crossovers the raised seating height? True SUV’s are designed for off road use but according to surveys 90% never see anything more challenging that a damp grass car park. Crossovers provide an elevated driving position but without the complications of 4 wheel drive, off road suspension and underbody protection etc. Just right for the jungle that is the school run or trip to the seaside.

[John Ratsey]

I find that my Mk4 EX Jazz rides better than my previous Mk3.

And my Crosstar rides better than the HR-V. The road felt smoother when I returned home from the dealer with my Crosstar after taking the HR-V for the trade-in deal.

[Expatman]

I find that my Mk4 EX Jazz rides better than my previous Mk3.

And my Crosstar rides better than the HR-V. The road felt smoother when I returned home from the dealer with my Crosstar after taking the HR-V for the trade-in deal.

That's why I will hold off a decision between the Crosstar and HR-V until I've seen and test driven both. Luckily I am not in any rush so can afford to wait.

[E27006]

Isn’t the real attraction of crossovers the raised seating height? True SUV’s are designed for off road use but according to surveys 90% never see anything more challenging that a damp grass car park. Crossovers provide an elevated driving position but without the complications of 4 wheel drive, off road suspension and underbody protection etc. Just right for the jungle that is the school run or trip to the seaside.

The majority of SUVs never see more than a kerbstone to negotiate as the owners selfishly park upon pavements affecting  the safety  of pedestrians and children.  SUVs exist for the benefit of car makers profits. The USA car industry crashed in 2009,  they had given up on low profit high mpg cars, then oil prices rose,  the USA car makers were stuck  with their fuel wasting SUVs in a sales slump, while the Japanese took the market.