JasonWx wrote
The design is geared more towards style rather than function..
That's my issue with the newest CRV design. That rear quarter panel window is a joke. The new model had a marginal (maybe 1 mpg?) improvement in EPA ratings, and while it's listed at the same cargo space it's less usable.
I must say the design/shape of the older design (ending in 2006) is brilliant. We had a 1998 CRV - it had lower EPA ratings, less power and significantly less cargo space. It's actually easier to load ski gear for THREE in the 2006 than it was to load gear for two in the 1998.
Also in the I must say category ... our 98 was eight years old when we sold it and we got $10k for it FROM THE DEALER. That took a significant bite out of the payment for the new one.
Our current vehicle has 60 something thousand miles on it. (I'll look later for an exact number). I guess that's reasonable for an alternator.
My big issue really isn't the manufactures fault - I think. My cars rust like crazy. Because I don't drive them. We sold the 1998 with 80k on it because our mechanic told us the underside wasn't looking good. It looked cherry from the top and I'm sure that's why the dealer gave us a good price. It's the only real downside of walking to work. Current vehicle design assumes you are going to drive a car every day. If you only drive it once a week, or less in the summer the brakes, exhaust, underbody - they rust like crazy. Zelda drives a Honda too, and drives it every day. No rust issues at all.
"You just need to go at that shit wide open, hang on, and own it." —Camp