1997 Honda CR-V 2.0 petrol from North America


Great low-end SUV


Absolutely nothing.

General Comments:

Great car for long road trips, comfy with a lot of space for a couple.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 26th November, 2000

18th Jun 2001, 00:13

Bought my '97 CRV at 9km old in '97... June 17/01 achieved 100,000 and would never consider another vehicle. My only complaints are:

1. No lighter

2. Acceleration

3. Cruise control not so hot

1997 Honda CR-V LX 2.0 gas from North America


Great all-around vehicle for family and fun


Absolutely, positively, nuthin. You do the prescribed maintenance in the manual (my dealer had a very good service program), and any vehicle will treat you good.

I complained about a brake rotor shimmy right after I got it, but the problem seemed to take care of itself. I didn't notice it anymore after the first 3,000 miles.

General Comments:

Great Sport-Ute. 4x4 was excellent in the winter. I was still going through snow when other 4x4's weren't. I did not have one problem with this vehicle (except for the buying experience - see below) during the 40,000+ miles I owned it. It pays to change your oil every 3,000 miles, folks, even though your owners manual says you can do it less frequently.

Engine could use a boost. You had to be careful when you passed someone.

Had some problems with swirl marks in the paint. Probably too many automatic car washes and not enough hand-wax jobs.

Seating on the inside is spartan. I thought it was very comfortable, but I like still seats. If you're looking for plush, don't look here. The driver's seat has a unique way to adjust the lumbar in the back. It worked for me, but I could see how it wouldn't work for everyone.

Excellent rear seating. You would think that this "small" of a Sport Ute would have a miniscule back seat, but I was very amazed at the size and space they gave back seat drivers :-)

This was my 6th Honda (prior: 85 Accord, 87 CRX, 89 CRX [awesome 70+ MPG, still have it], 92 Accord, 95 Accord.) If you take care of them, they'll take care of you. The most problems I had with my Hondas are brakes (they seem to eat them), and CV joints. Oh yeah, pay attention to the warnings about timing belts. When I had my last one changed, the mechanic said I probably would have broken it the next day if I hadn't have changed it.

Although I don't own this vehicle anymore due to a growing family. I purchased a Toyota Sienna mini-van... tried for an Honda mini-van but the dealer just laughed and said I'd have to wait a year :-(

About the only thing bad was the dealership I bought it from. When I bought it, they were very popular and scarce. While in the process of negotiating the price, they accepted my offer. They called back later and refused it. Now I can't blame them because no paperwork was signed... just an agreement over the phone (which I gave out my credit card number to "seal" the deal), but hey folks, a deal's a deal. I sent a letter to Honda the next day describing the whole experience. Guess what? The same day they got it, I had a phonecall from the dealership and my brand spankin' new CR-V in my driveway that evening. Moral of the story: A deal's a deal.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 17th August, 2000

24th Jul 2001, 19:19

Changing your oil every 3,000 miles is a big waste of time and money unless you never take trips of 20 miles or more between oil changes. The U.S. government spent millions of dollars on research that determined that 6,000 miles was the magic number for oil changes.

I have a 1993 Ford Crown Victoria with 237,000 miles that I change the oil in every 6,000 miles. I bought the car from the original owner with 33,000 miles on it. Another similar rumor that higher octane is better is also false unless your vehicle is designed for it.

27th May 2002, 08:11

I agree. I think it is insane to change your engine oil at 3,000 miles. That is an incredible waste of oil.

Here in the UK most Japanese and German cars come with 10,000 mile service intervals. I think this is much more realistic. On my VW Golf I change the oil every 8,000 on Mobil 1 and it still comes out clean.

Americans have to change their school of though on this matter as it is wasting precious resources.

2nd Apr 2005, 22:17

Waste of resources? Just where do you think the petrol that fuels your car comes from? I agree that it is fairly excessive to change your oil every 3000 miles, but in terms of wasted resources, Engine oil is totally insignificant compared to the crude that goes into making petrol or gasoline.

If you want to waste fewer resources, leave the car at home.

26th Aug 2005, 14:07

Waste of oil? I disagree! I change my oil on all of my vehicles at 2500 miles, I've got a 89 CRX with 526,000 mile on it, and with the exception of a few seal changes, haven't had the first internal engine problem. My 97 CR-V has 155,000 mile on it and runs better than day one. Keep in mind, I work on Honda's daily and see what extended runs between oil changes do to these cars. Yes, you can run a car 6000 or more miles between oil changes, but don't expect that car to run forever as a result. Oil begins to break down as soon as it's put into service, with MOST oils exceeding their EFFECTIVE lubricating life within 2500-3500 miles. Moral of the story here, stick to the operators recommendations; run the correct viscosity of oil, and change it at recommended intervals.

1997 Honda CR-V from North America


None for the first 15,000 miles.

General Comments:

Could use a little peppier engine and a slightly larger gas tank.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 29th June, 1998