Honda HR-V Forum banner

41 - 60 of 83 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
484 Posts
All the small SUV's we checked out had to put a back seat down in order to get a golf bag in. The HR-V can handle 2 golf bags, 2 pull carts, 2 shoe bags, +++, in the cargo area all under the cargo cover. Still have all passenger seats available. Plus you can sit on the back ledge and comfortably change your shoes. This is incredible.

The seats are very comfortable, it drives like a car, is peppy enough, steering is positive, love the steering wheel controls for the phone, radio, etc.
So far, it exceeds our expectations, which were frightfully high, having waited for this car for over a year. Hoping the love affair continues.

That looked...green, until I saw the light colored seats. What color is your HRV?
At this level of car, there are always trade-off's. After years of not being able to haul ANYTHING in my Civic...I'm giving preference to that big cavity over some other things. I notice that like the HRV....the CX3 does not support Car Play for iPhone or Android.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
547 Posts
I think torque-wise the CX-3 isn't too shabby. It's got 146 ft-lb rather than the 127 ft-lb the HRV makes, but more importantly it comes on early at 2800 rpms vs all the way up at 4300rpms for the HRV. That means you really have to wring the snot out of the HRV in order to get any power out of that mill.
Yes but read more of the available early U.S. reviews and you'll see some critiques on when and where the CX3 torque is only adequate at best. Loud engine revving noise does get past the sound dampening during passing and such. Recall that this is a toned-down Mazda3 engine. Some compromises had to be made for engineering reasons. The handling of the CX-3 is really where the 2 cars differ on the road and while the CX-3 wins overwhelmingly a few reviewers pointed out circumstances where the HR-V had an edge.

It's a shame none of my local Mazda dealers are near a highway because aI 'd really like to give that torque a test.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
All the small SUV's we checked out had to put a back seat down in order to get a golf bag in. The HR-V can handle 2 golf bags, 2 pull carts, 2 shoe bags, +++, in the cargo area all under the cargo cover. Still have all passenger seats available. Plus you can sit on the back ledge and comfortably change your shoes. This is incredible.

The seats are very comfortable, it drives like a car, is peppy enough, steering is positive, love the steering wheel controls for the phone, radio, etc.
So far, it exceeds our expectations, which were frightfully high, having waited for this car for over a year. Hoping the love affair continues.
Throw in the terrific mpg and you get the perfect description of a fine vehicle! Thanks, MsPractical.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
162 Posts
The HR-V came up in another discussion about the CX-3, this time in a question on the Washington Post's Real Wheels Live:

Q: sporty small SUV
What would you recommend for a small SUV that has good handling and brakes and reasonably good power. I am considering the BMW X1/X3, Audi Q3, and new Mazda CX3. Anything else I should consider? Thank you.

A: Lou Ann Hammond
Honda HRV.

The HRV and CX3 are great cars.

— JUL 31, 2015 11:53 EDT


http://live.washingtonpost.com/real-wheels-live-20150731.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
262 Posts
PC Magazine posted a review of the CX-3. it draws comparisons to the HR-V, and reaches the following conclusion:

Should I Buy the CX-3?
There's a lot of competition in the subcompact SUV segment, including the Honda HR-V (which is basically a bigger Honda Fit$20,925.00 at TrueCar), the Buick Encore$26,534.00 at TrueCar, and we'd also add the Mazda3$27,290.00 at TrueCar, among a number of others. Of these, the Honda HR-V is the most direct opponent to the CX-3. The HR-V is taller, wider, longer, and does a better job hauling cargo with its Magic Fold second-row seats. However, the CX-3 handles better, gets better fuel economy, and Mazda offers a wider selection of driver assist features. If you're looking for a subcompact SUV, either car is a very solid option.


http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2488475,00.asp
It's a pet peeve of mine when things get over-generalized. The HR-V and CX-3 have the same fuel economy on their AWD models as well as all highway ratings. The CX-3 is only one mpg better in the city rating on front-wheel drive models. To me, that does not mean the CX-3 "gets better fuel economy".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
547 Posts
The HR-V came up in another discussion about the CX-3, this time in a question on the Washington Post's Real Wheels Live:

Q: sporty small SUV
What would you recommend for a small SUV that has good handling and brakes and reasonably good power. I am considering the BMW X1/X3, Audi Q3, and new Mazda CX3. Anything else I should consider? Thank you.

A: Lou Ann Hammond
Honda HRV.

The HRV and CX3 are great cars.

— JUL 31, 2015 11:53 EDT


http://live.washingtonpost.com/real-wheels-live-20150731.html

An unqualified answer. Both are great cars at least from the specs since very few U.S.A. folk have driven one yet.

Further down the page they are asked who puts the best advanced electronic safety tech into their cars:

Q: Electronic Safety Equity Equipment
Which mainstream manufacturer is doing the best job of installing electronic safety systems (such as lane departure warning, etc) into their cars.

A: Warren Brown
Hyundai-Kia, in terms of value,affordability and innovation/

Honda also

— JUL 31, 2015 11:35 EDT


Actually Mazda and Subaru are well ahead of Honda, Hyundai and Kia as far as U.S. models go, though affordability is another issue. I'm talking here about tech like Subaru's Eyesight and Mazda's i-Activesense. Some elements
of these systems showed up in the Canadian 2016 HR-Vs because... well... Canada.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
547 Posts
It's a pet peeve of mine when things get over-generalized. The HR-V and CX-3 have the same fuel economy on their AWD models as well as all highway ratings. The CX-3 is only one mpg better in the city rating on front-wheel drive models. To me, that does not mean the CX-3 "gets better fuel economy".
Good point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
162 Posts
An unqualified answer. Both are great cars at least from the specs since very few U.S.A. folk have driven one yet.

Further down the page they are asked who puts the best advanced electronic safety tech into their cars:

Q: Electronic Safety Equity Equipment
Which mainstream manufacturer is doing the best job of installing electronic safety systems (such as lane departure warning, etc) into their cars.

A: Warren Brown
Hyundai-Kia, in terms of value,affordability and innovation/

Honda also

— JUL 31, 2015 11:35 EDT


Actually Mazda and Subaru are well ahead of Honda, Hyundai and Kia as far as U.S. models go, though affordability is another issue. I'm talking here about tech like Subaru's Eyesight and Mazda's i-Activesense. Some elements
of these systems showed up in the Canadian 2016 HR-Vs because... well... Canada.
If you follow him enough, you will find that Warren Brown speaks very highly of Subaru. He's knowledgeable about the safety tech available from them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
741 Posts
Having followed develops going on at Kia/Hyundai i'm happy to see someone like this talking highly of them which at the very least would send someone to looking into vehicles offered from these brands.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
262 Posts
I was recently in a 2015 Mitsubishi Outlander that had Lane Departure Warning, Adaptive Cruise Control, and Forward Collision Mitigation. I don't know well enough to say who is "leading" in these technologies, but I think it's safe to say that this tech will be available in all but an entry-level car in the next year or two.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
547 Posts
If you follow him enough, you will find that Warren Brown speaks very highly of Subaru. He's knowledgeable about the safety tech available from them.
He must have felt Subaru was too upscale for an answer.

Hyundai and Kia have made great strides. I just don't think they're at the level of the Japanese vanguard yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
262 Posts
He must have felt Subaru was too upscale for an answer.

Hyundai and Kia have made great strides. I just don't think they're at the level of the Japanese vanguard yet.
Which is interesting, because Hyundai/Kia aren't the bargains they once were.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
tested both the CX-3 and HRV. HRV was our winner by a long run! The CX-3 felt too much like a coupe and I find the interior styling lacking and "leatherette" just feels awful! Also HRV has such great cargo capacity compared to CX-3 which made it a win for us!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
547 Posts
tested both the CX-3 and HRV. HRV was our winner by a long run! The CX-3 felt too much like a coupe and I find the interior styling lacking and "leatherette" just feels awful! Also HRV has such great cargo capacity compared to CX-3 which made it a win for us!
Canadian CX-3?

Which trims did you test for each vehicle?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Yeah, I think the CX-3 is a better looking vehicle but, in my case, it's just not for me. For one thing, is this vehicle even out in the states yet? Try finding one at a dealer, it's like vaporware.
And speaking of dealers, the closest Mazda dealer to my location is almost 100 miles away. That's a little too far to drive for service. I needed something with the most room for the buck and the HR-V is almost impossible to beat in that category. The CX-3 is sportier looking, at the expense of cargo room. And while anything Mazda makes is the de facto darling of Car and Driver magazine, the interior of the CX-3 just leaves me thinking "meh". It looks like they glued an iPad onto the dashboard.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Tried one of these. The backseat is terrible with little headroom, crowdy, no where near the storage in the rear, seats felt cramped and hard, the cockpit controls seemed rather cheap and plasticky. I'm coming out of am Mazda 3 and it seems like the same car with higher clearance, what's the point? Did not even try it. Salesman basically said, drive the others, you'll be back. Arrogant and the vroom factor is just not enough to sell this. Have an Hvr on order!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
As someone who is currently driving a 2008 Mazda 3 and moving to the HRV, I do have some thoughts on Mazda versus Honda which may or may not apply in any one case. I have been a Honda driver since my first 1980s Accord and am generally sold on Honda. From time to time I take a break and get something else, just for a change up. Last time I went with the Mazda 3 with the 2.3L. I love driving the car compared to the previous Civic, which I did like. However, the Mazda is just **** fragile compared to any Honda I have ever had. At 62,000 I need new front struts and have a busted engine mount. Headlights burn out regularly and are hard to replace because of some weird configuation of the clip that holds them in. The glovebox door busted a latch 10,000 miles ago and had to be removed. Two exterior trim pieces are problems. And let's not forget the corroding TPMS valves, two of which have failed within 50,000. They no longer use that part, but that didn't help me on the highway last year at 5:00p on a Saturday.

Overlooking the POS OEM tires that lasted 10,000 miles, and the annoying headlight replacements, I was very happy with the Mazda until the TPMS and now the struts. Maybe Hondas have gotten this bad by now, too, I guess I will find out soon. But the aformentioned Civic is still on the road at 120,000, having had an engine mount replaced at twice the mileage of the Mazda that needs the same replacement. YMMV
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
I had been considering the CX3 until I saw one up close and realized how small the cargo space is. Even the back hatch seemed smaller than any of its competition. I'm still considering the CX5 as a possible contender, but I need cargo space, so the CX3 is definitely out for me.
 
41 - 60 of 83 Posts
Top