Honda HR-V Forums > Honda HR-V 2021-

HR-V e:HEV vs Crosstar

(1/3) > >>

John Ratsey:
All this talk of dealers offering good trade-in prices got me thinking as I've had emails from my dealer who is seeking fairly new vehicles for resale. Since I don't want to be left without transport then the question is what to buy to replace my 2 year old Crosstar? SWAMBO wouldn't accept the normal Jazz as she likes a high seat. Neither of us like very dark colours, which limits the choice. Where could we improve on the Crosstar? The boot is often inadequate for our needs and the uneven floor is a nuisance. The ride could be better and my daughter took a dislike to the Crosstar's back seats while my early Crosstar, without the undertray, didn't like cold weather.

A bright red low mileage 2022 HR-V Elegance in the dealer's used vehicle stock got me thinking as I had a Mk 2 HR-V before my Crosstar. While the advertised HR-V boot capacity is little more than the Crosstar (319 vs 298 litres) it looked much larger in the photos. So I phoned up the dealer and got an appointment to look at the HR-V. The HR-V boot is definitely larger. The width between the wheel arches is the same (102cm) but the HR-V has a section 132cm wide behind the wheel arches and is a maximum 76cm depth vs the Crosstar's 65cm. And the floor is flat with a bigger underfloor cubby hole. Length with rear seat folded is about 1.7m to the back of the driver's chair in a comfortable position for me vs 1.5m length in the Crosstar. The disadvantages of the HR-V are the greater width (2028mm over mirrors vs 1966mm and 1790mm vs 1725mm over the body) and the lower fuel economy. The WLTP combined value is 52.3mpg for the HR-V vs 58.9mpg for the Crosstar (ie 89%) but, strangely, there is only 3% difference in the WLTP medium cycle which is probably where I do a lot of driving.

While the dealer's price for the used HR-V was more than the base cost of the new one, the red HR-V paint is an extra cost item. It also has the Honda mats and the salesman noted that it has the 5 year service plan (which I always want) and the warranty extension to 5 years (which I don't normally buy given Honda's reliability). I thought it was worth a haggle although the trade-in value of my Crosstar (approaching 10k miles over more than 2 years) fell about £2k short of what it had cost me. Anyway, I had approval from SWAMBO to do a deal provided her seat was higher (about 2" according to a rough measurement when I compared the two vehicles at the dealer), so I accepted the offer with collection booked for 1st October (the Crosstar went to the dealer on 29th September to minimise the vehicle tax which is charged per calendar month).

My findings so far, which are based on a 140 mile round trip on cross-country A roads are:

1. The HR-V gives a smoother ride. I was worried that the HR-Vs 18" wheels with 50mm tyres would give a harsh ride but the suspension evidently more than compensates.
2. The HR-V is generally more comfortable. My adult daughter who considered the Crosstar's rear seat to be short of padding found the HR-V's rear seat to be fine. SWAMBO had no complaints although I'm still fine-tuning the position of the driver's seat.
3. Engine noise in the HR-V is less than in the Crosstar (although it was only noticeable when the engine was worked hard). I haven't yet had a need to work the HR-V's engine hard but, under normal conditions, road noise is more dominant.
4. I prefer the Crosstar's instrument panel (perhaps because I'm used to it).The HR-V has both an analogue speedometer and a digital one (a bit smaller than on the Crosstar). As I'm used to looking at a digital speedo (and subtracting 2mph to get the true speed - haven't yet checked this on the HR-V), the analogue speedo is effectively a waste of space but I assume there had been some adverse reaction to the digital-only offering on the Mk 4 Jazz. The HR-V doesn't have a permanently displayed battery gauge, which I consider a step backwards as state of charge helps with understanding what the car is doing. It's necessary to use the power flow option on the multi-function display to see the battery charge.
5. I had wondered if the drive quality would suffer due to the 1.5 litre engine and the heavier vehicle. However, it was fine on my first trip (no very steep hills or more than 60mph). While the HR-V offers three drive modes: Sport, Normal and Econ, I've only used Econ (as on the Crosstar) which seems fine for my needs.
6. The HR-V has paddles for adjusting the level of regenerative braking. If driving in D the paddles need to be used each time the brakes are applied but the paddle setting is remembered when in B mode (which I used on the Crosstar). I found the maximum regeneration setting (four positions available) to be no more and possibly less than the standard setting on Crosstar.
7. The HR-V reported 59mpg on the outward leg of my trip and 64mpg on the return. The latter benefited from a dry road and a favourable breeze. I'm assuming 5% optimism in the car's calculation (the Crosstar was 6% optimistic over 9,500 miles) which puts the average mpg on this trip at about 58.5 but I was hoping for over 60 (but we did have four adults on board instead of the normal two). My long term target average for the HR-V is 62.5mpg based on the HR-V WLTP average being 89% of the Crosstar where I averaged 70.5mpg. However, I'll need a year before I can reach a conclusion.
8. It's early days but I have noticed that the HR-V doesn't automatically run the engine when starting the car with a cold engine. There's probably an ambient temperature threshold but I consider this a significant improvement as the initial part of any journey is probably slow speed manoeuvering which can easily be done on battery unless the charge is very low.
9. My HR-V's auto headlights are over-sensitive and can be triggered by a couple of trees overhanging the road. This used to be a problem on the Mk 3 Jazz / Mk 2 HR-V (upwards-looking sensor) but was fixed on my Crosstar. My dealer's service manager says that they don't have any information regarding adjusting the sensitivity.
10. The HR-V has reverted to pulling a lever under the dashboard to open the fuel filler cover whereas the Crosstar's cover is linked to the locking system.
11. My HR-V doesn't have the auto mirror folding on locking which I found to be a useful indication that the car is locked. To get that feature I would need the Advance version.
However, I'm happy that my HR-V doesn't have tinted windows on the back as these make the rear seats more claustrophobic.
12. My HR-V doesn't have USB sockets for the rear seats (available as a >£100 option) but the rear seat passengers do benefit from their own air vents under the centre console.

All for now. Any questions?

Jayt43:
Great write up. Thank you!

How does rear visibility compare to the Honda Jazz? Does the more rakish angle of the HR-V's rear windscreen affect the view out (similar to some older Civics like the 2006 spaceship)?

I also noticed, when I took a look at the HR-V, that the inner plastic shroud on the hatch itself impinges (quite alot) onto the rear windscreen. Have you noticed any difference in practice?

For sure, the HR-V is the classier looking vehicle. Even in Japan there is much noise about the sluggish sales of the Mk 4 Jazz, especially as it's being outsold by the Honda N-Box (Kei car) by a ratio of 4:1! And that's primarily because of how it looks (Crosstar included).

The new 2023 CR-V looks pretty smart (if slightly conservative) but the front-end of the HR-V is definitely the most stylish of the three. Thanks again!

John Ratsey:

--- Quote from: Jayt43 on October 04, 2022, 01:17:51 PM ---How does rear visibility compare to the Honda Jazz? Does the more rakish angle of the HR-V's rear windscreen affect the view out (similar to some older Civics like the 2006 spaceship)?

I also noticed, when I took a look at the HR-V, that the inner plastic shroud on the hatch itself impinges (quite alot) onto the rear windscreen. Have you noticed any difference in practice?

--- End quote ---
You are probably correct that the view out of the HR-V rear window is smaller than the Crosstar but I've not noticed a problem. It's enough for seeing what's behind me when driving along and, for reversing, there's the reversing camera which provides a much wider view than any window could ever provide.

NoelM:
That’s a very good write up on the comparisons between the two.
I changed my 21 plate Crosstar (purchased new) for new 72 plate at the weekend. There are improvements on the latest car as I posted elsewhere. Subtle changes I think mainly software I assume

Kremmen:
When I was ready to order my Jazz I was advised to wait for a MY22. Not by a dealer but by a trusted inside source.

I wasn't told why and not having owned a MY21 I can't compare.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version