Choose life. Choose a side hustle because your regular 9-5 doesn’t pay enough to cover your cost of living. Choose an expensive television to watch vacuous mid-wits desperate for five minutes of fame because attention is the only currency that matters anymore. Choose finding Hot Wheels in the supermarket because that’s the only excitement in your life. Choose spending an extra five minutes in the shower just to feel some warmth. Choose to wear jogging bottoms on the weekend because really what’s the point? Choose a crossover because your partner won’t be seen dead in a minivan or a wagon.
Crossovers. The official car of your image writing cheques your lifestyle can’t cash. No one actually spends their weekends mountain biking and kayaking. Honestly, who has the energy for that? With apologies to Irvine Welsh, why do people keep choosing them? The truth is more and more customers are finding the raised seating position makes it easier to get in and out, and better for strapping recalcitrant children into their seats. Ford Exploders and Rollover Rhinos are a long distant memory. There’s not much of a handling or fuel economy penalty over a traditional hatch or saloon, and have you seen the state of the nation’s tarmac recently?
The Honda HR-V (or ZR-V if you’re in the UK, which I am) is a Civic in hiking boots. Wedged in between the smaller UK-market HR-V (which has no American counterpart) and the larger CR-V (which is identical to the USA model, minus the steering wheel position), the ZR-V is pitched as being a sporty crossover for when your heart says Macan but your bank account says Ma-can’t. Compared to the 5-door Civic hatch, the ZR-V is about 130 mm longer, 100 mm wider, and 200 mm taller (or five, four, and eight inches in the aforementioned dimensions, for those of you who can’t imagine millimeters). Despite the ZR-V standing a healthy 200 mm / 8-inches taller than the Civic, only two of those inches are accounted for by a boost in ride height. This suggests Honda has prioritized passengers over luggage, a presumption born out by the fact the ZR-V has fractionally less boot space than the Civic. And the ZR-V is 2WD only, so don’t get any ideas about tackling the Rubicon – this is firmly a road-orientated machine.
A 2.0 Liter That Goes Like a 3.0 Liter
Civic Type R, motorbikes, and lawn mowers aside, all UK-market Hondas are now hybrids or fully electric. The ZR-V’s power system, dubbed e:HEV by Honda, uses a 2-liter, 4-cylinder engine paired with two electric motors and a CVT-style transmission for a grand total of 181 bhp and about 233 pound-feet of torque. If you think this sounds like a lot of motor for a C (compact) category car, Honda claims it gives the performance of a 3.0-liter ICE. Having driven the old Range Rover Velar three-liter with enough torque to spin the earth backwards, I’m not sure about that – but the ZR-V does get down the road well enough, with 0-60 quoted as 7.8 seconds. And don’t let the letters CVT fill you with dread; the engine spends most of its time functioning as a generator for the tiny 1.05kWh battery as the e:HEV system blends seamlessly between electric-only, hybrid, and engine-only power depending on road speed and the angle of your ankle.
Under slightly fiercer acceleration, the ZR-V mimics gear changes so you’re not subject to the awful, constant-note droning of an engine being held at maximum torque. You press the accelerator and it goes, clever electronics and powertrain management figuring out the rest. It’s responsive, powerful, and efficient … but maybe too quiet. Like the Juke hybrid I drove earlier this year, there’s no rev counter, only a power gauge, so you never know exactly what the engine is up to. Selecting Sport mode relieves some of the noise suppression and makes it easier to sense what’s going on rev-wise. And what else does Sport mode do? I’m getting there …
How Much More Black Can It (the interior) Be?
Massaging the ZR-Vs sport credentials are a pair of actual real-metal paddles behind the steering wheel … but instead of manipulating gears, they control the amount of regenerative braking. I’ve never quite understood this as a control choice because it goes against an established design heuristic. Confusingly, pulling back on the left paddle increases the regen only for a couple of seconds in normal and eco modes. As soon as you take your foot off the brake, it reverts back to the nominal setting. The increased regen effect only remains in place in Sport mode. Given the whole point is to put extra power back into the battery, surely that’s how it should operate in eco mode – meaning that in Sport mode, the paddles could be used for something more appropriate like maybe, oooh I dunno, banging up and down a simulated set of gears? I asked Honda the reasoning behind this (actual journalism. I know. Don’t worry. Standards will drop again shortly) and they said the intention was for the regen system to be as non-invasive as possible, so customers transitioning from pure ICE vehicles to BEV or hybrid vehicles will have a familiar driving experience, leaving Sport mode to simulate aggressive engine braking. I get Honda’s reasoning, if I’m not entirely sure I agree.
Paddle confusion aside, the rest of the dashboard is “so far, so Civic” with proper rotary controls for the HVAC and the same excellent pushbutton drive selector found on the electric-only Honda e. At the front of the center console there’s a wireless charging mat, and the center console is deep enough to keep your snacks tantalizingly out of reach. The only slight ergonomic whiffs are the Start button (it’s hidden behind the steering wheel) and the door-bin drink holders (each is suitable for a single serving wine-bottle and not much else).
Of the ZR-V’s interior, I must say – and coming from me, this might sound odd – it is a bit unremittingly black in there. There’s bright piping on the power-adjustable seats, but as far as interior jazz goes, that’s the entire lot. The driving position (which I have seen criticized elsewhere as being a bit low) I found to be fine. You can see plenty of bonnet through the windscreen, so although this isn’t a big car, maneuvering it is even more of a snap than expected for its size. The rear footwell is completely flat, so a third passenger in the back won’t have to splay their legs to find space for their feet, but sadly there are no Honda Magic Seats to really take full advantage of the flat floor. Even though total cubic capacity is slightly less than the Civic’s, there’s plenty of boot space and some clever thinking going on: curry hooks for takeout; and spotlights to illuminate how much of mess the dog has made; and the parcel shelf can be removed, folded, and stored in a hidden compartment under the floor. There’s also hands-free tailgate opening for when your arms are full of wriggling children, groceries or in my case all the stuff I take RC racing on a Friday night. 
It’s Sort Of A Macan If You Squint
I’m less concerned with practicality and more concerned with how good the stereo is (it’s excellent) and whether or not I look good behind the wheel (I do). I’ve noted before how Japanese OEMs are quieting down their exterior designs and leaving the busyness to the Koreans. The ZR-V is no exception. Because outright practicality wasn’t a priority, the ZR-V isn’t a box on stilts. It’s subtly muscular with its raked rear window, and the rear three-quarters that has a hint of Porsche about it. Up front, the grille is sensibly sized and filled by a funky hexagonal pattern (a design flourish that’s much easier to do now that parametric tools are built into modeling software) and simple but distinctive light graphics. The whole thing is clean and taut without being overburdened with unnecessary visual quirks and gimmicks that add nothing but noise. I don’t like the black wheels, but other optional designs are offered, and the higher level Advance trim gets some natty diamond-cut numbers that add a more a bit more of a sporting, sophisticated touch and more importantly aren’t all black. 
So the ZR-V goes against type by looking a bit sporty. And as far as crossovers go, it does drive rather sportily as well. Setting off for the first time, I was surprised at how firmly it rode. And how noisily. Not Type R raucousness, but din enough to drown out the engine on the motorway on grainier tarmac. That underlying buzz extends to the steering, which is chatty and well weighted – but I wouldn’t say no to a bit more sharpness. The ride and handling balance dial is resolutely turned towards responsiveness over comfort. There’s enough feedback and body control to keep you interested on a twisty road without the ZR-V ever feeling out of its element. All the while, the added torque of the hybrid system is capable of hurling you out of corners at deceptively high speeds. More than a couple of times I glanced at the clocks and was surprised by how rapidly I was going, without ever feeling like I was about to put the Honda on its roof.
The ZR-V Honda lent me was the mid-range Sport (I kid you not) trim, which requires swiping the plastic for a punchy £41,095 without any options. In the UK you’re probably better of settling for the slightly cheaper Elegance trim to slide under the Vehicle Excise Duty £40k threshold, but that will mean going without wireless charging, BOSE, adaptive headlights, electric front seat adjustment (all non-essential) and the powered tailgate (absolutely essential). In the US, the car does without the hybrid system and the extra 40 bhp or so it provides but is usefully cheaper starting at $24k for the naked LX trim. At that price, if the US version is half as handy on back roads as the UK one, it’s a bargain.
Crossovers Are Here To Stay, You May As Well Get Used To It
Crossovers attract a lot of opprobrium for being tall, heavy, wobbly blobs that no right-minded enthusiast would choose of their own accord, and that somehow OEMs have foisted them onto the market in some grand conspiracy to avoid selling normal sedans and hatches. Here’s a dazzling insider trade secret: OEMs are in the business of making money, and margins in the volume sector are not great. You know what happens when a customer walks into your showroom wanting a crossover and you don’t offer one? They walk straight out again, across the street to a competitor who does. Customers like crossovers, and the cost of one or two miles per gallon is a trade they’re willing to make for a raised driving position and ease of access. And if you have been told the next family hauler has to be a crossover, good news: that doesn’t have to mean you’ve been crushed by life. Not if you get a ZR-V (or HR-V, for you Americans). The Honda ZR-V is a crossover for people who would rather have a degree of driving feel than the last cubic liter of cargo capacity. Its profile picture isn’t caked in mud sweatily finishing a tough mudder race. Seriously, does anyone find those attractive?
The ZR-V is the character in the background you secretly suspect is having more fun than appearances suggest.
Blah blah blah, I like the vehicle for one reason, the color. I bet despite the ad it can’t be ordered in that color. Ad for every subset wants an SUV, I am tired of mine. Not because it doesn’t thrill me even after 22 years it just keeps getting harder climbing in with pants I have to wear because I can’t get a good fit.
I don’t get why Honda doesn’t offer the hybrid in the US. I’m glad we have a more affordable version but the hybrid as an upgrade powertrain seems obvious.
My guess would be it they feel it would make it price uncompetitive within in its segment. Which given the price difference between US and UK versions seems odd because there’s a big fucking difference between $24k and £40k
I got hung up on £40k and what that kind of coin would buy here in the land of deep-fried assault rifles.
“It’s like, how much more black could this be? And the answer is none. None more black.”
I like the blue…and it’s a Honda!
(Although I like it, still not getting a crossover ha ha)
Complaining about the blackness of the interior and the black wheels? I think I’m going to have to make a report to the Council of Goths, cause this simply isn’t up to our cultural standards, as you are well aware. Please expect to be called in front of the Council in 7-10 days.
At like 11pm, right?
Absolutely. We don’t meet in daylight.
I am The Council.
A council implies more than one person, therefor you may be a part of the council, but you are not THE council.
I ended up stuck with a crossover because I wanted to go EV, only had the budget for used and wanted adaptive cruise, more than 200 miles of range, and CarPlay, leaving me with extremely limited options.
The previous generation HR-V looks so different than this one, I almost thought they were different models altogether. I suppose the (somewhat) attractive previous HR-V wasn’t boring enough for the target demographic?
The previous generation was based on the sadly departed Fit. This one is based on the Civic.
The U.S. version HR-V’s upper trim levels are sorely in need of the Civic EX’s 1.5T to give it some oomph and make the price premium worth it. Unless Honda is obviously avoiding an upgraded engine to avoid cannibalizing CR-V sales, perhaps a HR-V hybrid is incoming.
10.5 zero to 60 in the U.S. Nope.
Jason daily drives several cars that do 0-60 in about 20. I daily a car that does about 14. My fastest car does about 11.5.
When you were a kid, your mom drove you around in a car that took at least 14. Your first car probably took at least 14.
If you can’t manage with 10.5 seconds, you’re doing something wrong.
My first car was an eight year old 1963 Valiant. 0-60 in eventually. So I di agree with you.
My car does it in 8.5 seconds. It’s not that I can’t manage with it, I want faster! I ain’t getting any younger 😉
10.5 seconds is doable, but a car either has to be really charming or cheap to justify it now. Most small crossovers aren’t either cheap or charming enough.
As a personal gripe as well, I hate slow cars with automatics, and I don’t think the manuals are coming back, so a bit more oomph is kind of expected.
Doable? 10.5 is in the “I only floor it twice a year during especially sketchy merges” range.
If you regularly floor it and just barely make it, your car is barely fast enough.
If you rarely floor it, only in extenuating situations, your car is comfortably fast.
If you never floor it your car is totally faster than it needs to be.
If you regularly floor your car to merge, you’re living a strange life. I live somewhere with a ton of cars and very short on ramps, but traffic does a great job of making merges easy for slow cars. I don’t think I’ve ever had to floor a car to merge, except when I had an incredibly gutless 2000 Galant with the I4. And considering my current engine is a 1.8L I4 (Vibe), that’s saying something.
You sound like you’ve never driven a truly slow car. Some on ramps are short enough that my pickup is floored and shifting at redline just to be going 50mph by the time I get to the interstate and need to merge. I can do it, but barely. Therefore it’s exactly as fast as it needs to be and no faster.
And it feels like a Lamborghini compared to most heavy trucks. The heavy trucks I’m used to driving are floored, everywhere, no matter what you’re doing
We have on-ramps here that are no more than 2 car-lengths long. We also have plenty of traffic filled with impatient drivers. You either merge easily because of the neverending traffic, or just wait until you can merge. I guess you can floor it if you want to, but in a slow car (of which I’ve driven plenty) you know all that does is make a lot of noise and you go nowhere, so I learned to be patient and merge without putting the fear of a higher being into my passengers and fellow drivers.
Maybe heavy trucks are different loaded down, but I thought we were talking about naturally sedate cars (which is why I said if you regularly floor your CAR), not trucks overburdened with cargo relative to their powertrain. But also, I’m not sure flooring it down the on-Ramp and hoping for the best is a great strategy in an overloaded vehicle. It probably stops about as good as it accelerates.
Cars within the past 20 years are plenty fast for merging without burying the accelerator, unless the vehicle has an issue. My 1.8 I4 with 4 normal humans in it is by no means fast, but merging has never been an issue, and the 0-60 with that weight has got to be mid teens at best.
You’re talking about a freeway that’s difficult to merge onto because it’s stop and go and bumper to bumper. I’m talking about a freeway that’s hard to merge onto because the freeway is moving 70mph and you need to get more speed to make it into that gap.
You will not merge onto a 70mph freeway if you’re not going at least 60mph, and that’s a big issue in some cars on some on ramps. I’m gonna guess even a 4cyl Galant is faster in a straight 0-60 than a lot of cars. Like any of Jason’s cars, or my pickup that’s like 15 seconds, or some farm trucks I’ve driven won’t make it to 60 and will take over a minute to crack 50.
No, I mentioned that the highways are often filled with traffic, which negates the problem of merging much of the time. The rest of the time you still have the merge lane and for incredibly short on-ramps, everyone stops and waits to merge anyway because the ramps are too short to do anything else. Perhaps your area of the country is very different but we don’t have large flat expanses here.
If you’re talking 30+ yo cars or ancient/farm trucks, yeah sure, I guess those are poking into 20+ second 0-60 territory, but that’s a far cry from the 10.5 seconds that had been mentioned and the premise being at least a car from the last 20 years, since this article is about a new one. I can probably run faster than many farm trucks make it down an on-ramp, but that seems like an unfair example of a common daily you’d hit the highway with. We really don’t have farm trucks here but aren’t they supposed to stay on the farm unless you’re making an appearance on that Street Outlaws show?
This is talking about a new car, and my point was that 10.5 seconds is not a slow 0-60 and that if you never have to floor your car, meaning you never use its full acceleration potential, then the car is more than fast enough to do what you need it to do. So people should not complain that 10.5 is slow, and stop wastefully demanding that every car have 350hp.
Especially out east(where it sounds like you are) registration is so expensive that many farm trucks are not registered and have to stay off the highway, or have farm use plates that allow limited on highway use. Out here in Idaho, we don’t have onerously expensive registration and so farm trucks are typically fully registered and street legal. And I’m used to hauling mostly on public roads.
A lot of the problem is that American highways have very short on ramps, sometimes from a stop light. It’s bad road design. Slip roads in the UK (and much of Europe) are much longer.
Most American on ramps are fine, and more than enough for my slow cars to get up to 60+mph without even working excessively hard. Some on ramps are 7ncomfortably short for my slow cars, but I have never seen an on ramp short enough that 10.5 seconds 0-60 would be an issue.
All that makes sense, we are in very different places.
Registration isn’t crazy expensive, but we do have yearly inspections and you have to pass emissions. So we don’t get to have as many fun shitboxes here unless they’re over 25 yo, because then the safety inspections are basically “oh, you’ve got working seat belts, wipers, and lights….. move along”.
Registration depends on state(I know it really is terrible in some states) but then you have vehicle tax, safety inspection, and emissions testing.
Here in Idaho you walk into the DMV (you don’t even have to have the car or truck in question there) and tell them you would like to register your car. You pay them $75 for the year, they hand you plates, and your car is legal! No tax, safety, or emissions. I like this place.
Yeah, there are certainly huge differences state to state. I’m a bit torn on that one because on the one hand, it’d be convenient if it was easier to keep older vehicles in service around these parts, but on the other hand, when I read a David Tracy or watch some YouTuber from Michigan…. they have some scary dangerous crap driving around on their roads. And it’s not like they don’t have some “challenging” roads and weather to begin with.
It really would be nice to walk into the DMV with some money and little else though. Around here, I’d also settle for being able to walk out in under 2hrs. We have appointments now, but still, it’s a miserable process.
“and have you seen the state of the nation’s tarmac recently?”
“I was surprised at how firmly it rode.”
“The ride and handling balance dial is resolutely turned towards responsiveness over comfort.”
So it completely fails to do the one thing that would make this preferable to a Civic in any conceivable situation?
“The Honda ZR-V is a crossover for people who would rather have a degree of driving feel than the last cubic liter of cargo capacity.”
Good thing too, because:
“total cubic capacity is slightly less than the Civic’s”
My takeaway from this article was that it’s just a Civic but worse. Slightly worse, in every way, with zero advantages.
Not if one half of your life partnership insists on a crossover.
Or if you’re older and your mobility isn’t what it used to be. I thought my VW Jetta was fine. It’s not crossover tall, but not down on the ground like a roadster. My mom can’t get out of it without a struggle. That alone can push someone to get the crossover over a sedan or hatch.
My criticism of people’s car buying decisions applies equally to wives.
Hey don’t gender this, there are absolutely some husbands making these decisions.
The previous HR-V was worse than the Fit it was based on. Seems like the same thing.
The crossover M.O. is to be slightly worse than the car model for significantly more money. It’s a genius move for manufacturers, some top notch marketing, and consumers getting absolutely fucked over.
Slightly worse overall, but with a couple things(AWD, space, ect) that the crossover does arguably better than the sedan version. This one is notably terrible in doing not one single thing better than a Civic as far as I can tell.
Crossovers always have worse passenger space, you’re just told they’re better.
It’s something I noticed a few years ago – an ex was shopping for a car and bought a sedan because it was the only thing she could afford that had a big enough back seat for her friends. And it’s only getting worse still, I’m frequently finding crossovers I just plain can’t drive because of how cramped they are.
The US version of this car seems much worse. You only have a 158hp 2.0L engine that’s not a turbo, so it feels slow, yet only gets 28/27 mpg (FWD/AWD) combined, when nearly all of its competitors get 30+ mpg (the Mazda CX-30 gets 29 mpg, but it’s AWD and is significantly faster at 191hp). The CVT is more annoying here because the engine isn’t able to shut off like in a hybrid.
The exterior styling is doing the 2020 Escape thing where it’s trying to be carlike but ends up looking like a distorted, bloated version of a new Focus. The rear looks like they took the back of an A6 Avant and stretched and lifted it, making it look really awkward. However, styling is subjective and not necessarily that important as long as it’s ‘SUVish’ enough.
The interiors of new Hondas are great, and it’s no different in the Z/HR-V. The physical climate controls are excellent, and the dash spanning air vent styling motif looks great and will probably age decently well. It’s the main selling point of this car imo. Who cares about the exterior when you’re gonna be seeing the interior 90% of the time, amirite?
Personally I can’t recommend this car in the US because of the slow engine combined with the bad MPG, the good interior is not good enough to make up for it.
The north american mileage being a step back from the previous generation is an absolute embarrassment. I hope they get on with the hybrid here ASAP.
I’m seeing the older generation being rated for 27/31 and the new one being rated for 26/32. So not a step back in mileage. I’m confused.
It is much cheaper though
Definitely cheaper than the UK version, even though the US price excludes tax. However, it is priced in line with competitors.
The HVAC is pretty underpowered in the US version too. 4 people in a friend’s (black) 2022 had a sweaty ride in a western North Carolina August.
(Complains about too much black)
Who are you, and what have you done with our beloved goth uncle?!?
It’s like it’s actually Hadrian (b/c British) writing this – he favors cream or white clothing, hair combed back, owns a Lamborghini Jalpa, and has a fondness for Souxsie and the Banshees.
I saw a black over red Jalpa for sale a while back and it was exquisite.
Forty. Thousand. Pounds.
I would make some vague swipe about how much it costs to let a cardboard box these days, but apparently that can buy you THREE freeholds in Sunderland
Small Crossovers = Cars for people who have given up on life.
What would you recommend instead?
Actual cars – Such as:
Mazda3
VW GTI
Subaru Impreza
Hyundai Ioniq5 or 6
Kia EV6
Toyota Corolla Hatchback
new Toyota Prius
Honda Civic (But not the R)
Acura Integra (But not the S)
It’s funny because even 10 years ago any number of internet commenters would say the same thing about some of those cars – like Camry, Corolla, or Prius, “those buyers have given up.” But, people do still most of those cars. Several of them have posted sales gains YoY through November, like Mazda 3 +9%, Impreza +13%, Civic +52% (a consistent top seller with over 181k sold this year). The GTI hasn’t, but I don’t think anyone would expect your average buyers to go for one. And frankly, to said buyer, spending $30k+ on a small hatchback vs a roomier midsize sedan would look just as foolish as we think some of those buyers are for what they opt for. It’s all relative.
The Integra is a bit of an outlier too because there are people here that would say someone is foolish for spending over $30k on a fancy Civic with a CVT – but, plenty have, with over 30k sold YTD. More than the Prius for that matter, but even Toyota doesn’t doesn’t expect the Prius to quite the volume seller it once was, but it’s also priced alongside even a RAV4 hybrid which is a roomier vehicle. While on Toyota, we’ll just skip the Corolla hatchback as it’s compromised, smaller inside than even the Corolla sedan but more expensive, so not even a value play like the sedan. Any one of those other compacts are a better option.
The Ioniq 5 and EV6 get pitched as crossovers by the manufacturers, but ignoring that silliness, they along with the Ioniq 6 are also $40k+. Bit of an ask in an article about a car that tops out almost $10k less.
Ultimately, Adrian acknowledged the reasons people go for them in the review – things like driving position and ease of access. Even if we pretend SUVs never existed, people coming out of minivans have grown accustomed to that and would prefer to not stoop down into a low car. VW sort of hints toward the Taos being a Golf replacement. As a GTI owner, I’m not buying it, literally or figuratively, but I can say the Taos succeeds at those things over a Golf. I don’t like it but I get it.
Not giving any money to Hyundai/Kia after their response to the TikTok debacle, sorry.
The Corolla hatch is nice looking but honestly most modern vehicles are incredibly unappealing.
Just about everything is a truck, crossover or hybrid/electric. And anything that isn’t either has a CVT and/or you can’t see out of it at all. It’s depressing.
They are basic, boring vehicles. They also sell like crazy. I’m 100% on team car/hatchback/wagon, but I’ve accepted that normies love anything that they can tell themselves is an SUV. They’ll pay more than they would for an equivalent car without a care in the world. At this point it’s like complaining about how most truck buyers in the US never use them for truck stuff. That ship has long since sailed.
This is the point I was trying to make. Normal people do like them.
Yawn
Ah man that opening paragraph reminds me of the Subhumans song Get To Work On Time.
Also why is this hybrid not available in the US? WTF?
I know I’m probably in the minority as a car enthusiast who doesn’t really care about manual transmissions–but does the CVT “whine” really bother people that much?
I drive a Prius and unless the eCVT (which everyone here reminds me is mechanically different from a typical CVT) sounds markedly different from other CVTs, it really doesn’t bother me.
For me personally, just knowing the eCVT is more efficient gets rid of any reason to dislike it (maybe slowness, but that’s separate, in my eyes).
As someone who drives an eCVT hybrid Ford, I also don’t mind the ‘drone’ of the transmission holding constant RPM and saving me fuel, especially since the engine can shut off once I’m off the throttle. However, belt driven CVTs can make noticeable additional whine noises, especially when cold, that (planetary gearset) eCVTs don’t make.
Also CVTs are faster than fixed ratio transmissions as long as power at the wheels is the same 🙂
My Subaru Outback CVT only drives me nuts when using cruise control on the highway and it holds the engine at 3k rpm for longer than need be because there was a minor incline in the highway.
But honestly that’s more of an underpowered engine that needs the revs just to move it’s own weight than a CVT problem.
Stop blaming CVTs and start blaming underpowered engines/bloated vehicle weights everyone!
My first (terrible) experience with CVTs was test driving a 2014 Subaru Crosstrek. I was stunned by the difference between what I expected to hear from the engine vs. what the CVT forced the engine to sound like. Between that and the handful of CVT-equipped rental cars I’ve driven since then, I have no love for that type of transmission.
I am surprised they don’t offer that blue, or any blue really on the N.A. HR-V since it’s more common across the portfolio now. Nordic Frost is a nice blue-green hue, however.
They really should get the hybrid on offer here, I have to think there’s room pricewise to offer it without stepping on the CR-V. A friend just picked up a CR-V hybrid but would have almost certainly gone for an HR-V if it were available as a hybrid, both for the size and the styling.
Honda’s interior design is much improved and I appreciate them going for a bit more mature theme overall, and it would be a good go-to rec for everyday buyers along with the Corolla Cross, but for the price it’s thin on some content. There’s several features the ZR-V shown here has that we don’t – the power liftgate, I see rear seat air vents, and I think a rear center armrest. Fine on a Chevy Trax for thousands less, but a loaded HR-V knocks on $30k, a price at which competitors from Toyota and Kia offer that kit. Hopefully they add these things at refresh time. The vents and armrest are a particularly odd omission considering they make a point to say it has more passenger space than several competitors.
Do you have a great falls green VW? I just picked up a GFG Golf Alltrack!
I do, welcome to the club! Mine is a GTI SE manual with the plaid cloth. Which interior do you have?
I bought new and went 2 hours away to get the exact combo, and extremely glad I did. Almost weekly I get a compliment from someone on the color, be it someone I know or a stranger in a parking lot. Even when it’s dirty which is often, and despite the various dings I’ve acquired in nearly 6 years – which is of course more than any other car I’ve had, on the first car I ever really sought out a specific color.
I have an 18 Alltrack SEL. GFG with the Marrakesh brown sport seats. Had a 17 Alltrack for a few months, but made the financially-silly decision to trade that car in on my current one. Also my first time seeking out a specific color (and interior combo to boot) but I’m so glad I did.
There’s something to the color that feels elevated. I get positive comments on the car regularly too. I hope to hold onto it as long as I can as I doubt either of us will find something comparable in the future.
Excellent combo. Even the beige interior would still be a classic one too.
I had toyed with the idea of a 2017 GTI when they were blowing those out before the 2018s were even announced, but decided to wait out the lease on my car at the time and glad I did. I otherwise might have gone white or blue. The green is subtly different enough to stand out without being too loud.
It’s been mostly good in 42k miles so far, more nuisances like longtime suspension creaks that dealers say ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ about. But I hope it holds up and doesn’t turn on me as I want to keep it for a while, because like you say, I don’t know what I would replace it with.
The car is meh. The writing is superb.
Great job, Uncle Goth!
Ditto: I care not for reviews of cars I won’t buy, but I clicked for the byline, and got “angle of your ankle” for my trouble.
It sounds inane, but that’s what I’m trying to accomplish. You might not like the car, but I want to give you something enjoyable to read.
Exactly…mission accomplished and great work!
The writing is superb. Especially contrasted with the absolute trash that exists out there in free online articles, even from semi-respected sites. It’s like shitty AI is writing them and editors don’t exist. Not taking shots at this site, btw, I love the articles here even if they’re plainly written and more about content.
Who doesn’t love a good turn of phrase though? Even if you do measure in strange increments and talk about footwear when you really mean a trunk. I kid, I kid, I wish the US would embrace metric.
I wish North America got the full digital gauge cluster, the push button shifter, and the hybrid drivetrain in our HR-V. This one even gets a folding rear armrest and rear air vents while ours doesn’t!
I generally like Honda designs, but this … this is a gerbil on rollerskates.
I was going to ask, how does this compare to the Toyota CH-R, which looks like its most direct competition, but it looks like Toyota is no longer selling the CH-R, at least in Canada. That’s a pity, because I thought the CH-R looked kind of sporty.
Not sure if it’s offered in Canada yet, but the US now has the Corolla Cross as the spiritual successor to the CH-R. Matt Hardigree and other folks are big fans: https://www.theautopian.com/i-cant-believe-the-30k-toyota-corolla-cross-hybrid-is-this-good/
Toyota dropped the C-HR from North America once they rolled out the Corolla Cross. The big thing the North American C-HR lacked was an AWD option. There is a new-gen C-HR coming out in other markets, however.
Comparing the Cross and the HR-V – both have near identical standard powertrains, 2.0L I4/CVT with available AWD. The Cross offers a few more gadgets, while the Honda has more passenger space especially in the rear seat. The Cross offers a hybrid though while Honda doesn’t, and the hybrid Cross seems to be the way to go as it’s not only more efficient but much quicker too. Seems like a Cross Hybrid starts with a midlevel SE trim in Canada, and is about $1200 more than a comparable midlevel HR-V, the Sport.
In addition to what others have replied, the CH-R was considered to be a fairly bad option, because the sporty styling sacrificed some of the utility, and the car was slow and wasn’t fun to drive.
You also couldn’t see worth a damn out the back, we had one as a rental overseas.
Haven’t driven it because Toyota don’t want to lend me cars.
That’s a pity; sic David on them or something.
As a firmly middle aged man who loves wagons, I got into a crossover because I got tired of being blinded by everyone else’s headlights being directly at my eye level when driving at night. It was stressful and gave me headaches.
That was actually one of things I liked most when I finally got a truck last year (after decades in a sedan). Besides all the truck stuff I do with it, I’m no longer blinded by oncoming traffic. Seriously, one of things I like most.
So you’ve gone from being blinded to being the blinder?
It’s a Colorado so not really, but yes kinda. I still get blinded by full size trucks. Especially those super macho trucks with like 10 lights up front… And most jeep wranglers because they all seem to have the cheapest aftermarket lights their owner could find with extra wide beam patterns but they have angle eyes!
I remember that shutting the door of the first gen somehow felt cheaper than my Honda Fit
That face looks like it was lifted from a 12 yo Ford.
Which I for one like. I’m sad the Escape decided to try to go butch in 2024…it was becoming within striking distance of being a car. I get the market says all crossovers all the time, but can’t we have just one that’s kinda a secret nod to us dwindling old-school types?
I actually liked the first gen US HR-V/UK ZR-V design. The Civic influences gave it more of a hatchback than SUV feel. This version seems to go the other way, giving CR-V character to it. Kinda like how the 2024 Ford Escape has gone less Focus-y and more Explorer. Which I find sad, as the previous gen was getting eye-squintingly close to being car-like.
Adrian, how does this compare to the Ford Puma? If I have to accept crossovers, that’s the one that kinda does it for me right now.
Technically, the current gen is the third generation, just we didn’t get the first one and there were several years the first 2 gens. Guessing the original wouldn’t have been able to be sold over here any more cheaply than the larger, more powerful CR-V that was already selling like crazy.
Saw one of these in traffic yesterday in this same nice blue color. Between this and the great taillights on the latest gen Accord, Honda has been making some really good design choices lately.
It’s a shame we don’t get that engine option in the U.S. Just the NA 2.0 which is, frankly, dog slow.