2009 Honda CR-V SE+ 2.2 CTDI turbo diesel


Simply... terrible


The brakes had started to wear out only after 2 years, and we had to replace them. Same with the windscreen wipers, and we had to replace front and back.

The front set of tyres were replaced after 2 years.

Also there was a problem with the driver's window, so that was replaced under the warranty.

General Comments:

First of all, the car was terribly made and the car was very basic, even though we paid over 20000 pounds!

The plastic and seat materials are very cheap, and could be better.

The Japanese are no longer the top car makers, as other Korean, German and American car markers are better with a more competitive price.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 9th June, 2012

10th Jun 2012, 07:55

Strange - I would expect to replace wiper blades, brake pads and tyres after two years/30,000-odd miles, and would not see this as an indicator of quality; just renewables that need replacing as a matter of routine maintenance.

I guess the whole car was a step up from your previous Grand Vitara though, which has cheaper materials, but is not as car like - perhaps the more agricultural driving experience made you drive slower and preserved your tyres and pads?

The emergency services use the CR-V extensively due (particularly as paramedic first response cars) to its longevity and quality. I have used the CR-V, new Sportage, new IX35, Freelander and the Mazda CX-7, and would put the CX-7 and CR-V as my choice of a car-like SUV.

Perhaps try a CX-7, as they are being superceded by the more Eco CX-5 and no longer imported into the UK, so the run out CX-7 diesel Sport Tech models are available new at £22k as opposed to list at £29k (10/06/12), and this would be a step up in kit and quality from the CR-V.

Just expect some running costs, e.g. tyres/pads/wipers on any car, especially an SUV! I can't see anything terrible about the CR-V, except maybe a few plastics not being Euro-soft, and it being a little squishy on fast bends.