24 Hours With the CR-V - 2012 Honda CR-V Long-Term Road Test

2012 Honda CR-V Long Term Road Test

2012 Honda CR-V: 24 Hours With the CR-V

February 6, 2013

2012 Honda CR-V

I'm 40 years old, married, have two kids and live in suburbia. I'm guessing that's close to Honda's target demographic for its CR-V. So it's with some interest that I've been observing how the CR-V fits into my life. For the span of 24 hours, I figured I'd jot down what I did with the Honda. In hindsight, it was all pretty mundane and could have really used some Kiefer Sutherland-style cliffhangers. But it did show off the CR-V's suite of strengths.

First up was packing up the kids for a morning trip to Target. The 2012 Honda CR-V's rear doors, though not shown in the above photo, open quite wide, and that makes getting the kids in and out easier.

2012 Honda CR-V

Once at Target, the CR-V's 37 cubic feet of luggage space behind the second-row seats was more than enough for all of the stuff we bought. Throwing the Target bags into the back was also quite easy thanks to the CR-V's low lift-over height.

2012 Honda CR-V

Next, it was time to fuel up. Not having an available V6 is a common knock on the CR-V, but you can't complain about the fuel economy. We're averaging 25 mpg after 16,000 miles, which is spot on with the EPA combined average.

2012 Honda CR-V

By now Kiefer would have shot some terrorists and disarmed a bomb. Me? I picked up clothes from the dry cleaners. Notably, the CR-V's rear grab handles come in handy for hanging big groups of clothes hangers.

2012 Honda CR-V

Early the next morning I took my daughter to her elementary school. The CR-V is nice because it's relatively small and nimble (compared to the typical large SUVs or crossovers that people have at the school) and easy to park. The standard rearview camera also provides extra piece of mind when backing up in case there are children about.

So again, all pretty mundane stuff. But we can't all be Kiefer, and in that case the CR-V is there for you.

Brent Romans, Senior Automotive Editor @ 16,421 miles


  • stovt001_ stovt001_ Posts:

    There's a lot to be said for the humble NA 4 cyl, seeing how the vaunted turbocharged downsized 4 cyls are falling flat on their face in real world fuel economy. At the same time, that is a little disappointing to see only 25 MPG, as that's what we average in our V6 powered 2004 Taurus wagon, which has about as much utility as the CR-V.

  • duck87 duck87 Posts:

    The turbo 4's aren't so much falling flat on their face compared to NA 4-bangers; it's against the V6s where you're really seeing the difference. The Accord and Camry are rocketships (do you REALLY need 270+ hp in a midsize sedan?), and yet the fuel economy of these cars are actually really good- for many people it's only a few mpg difference compared to the NA 4-bangers. Which goes back to the complaint about the CR-V not having that option =)

  • Nice write-up, Brent! Honda CR-V – What Jack Bauer drives when he's not saving the country.

Leave a Comment

Past Long-Term Road Tests

Have a question? We're here to help!
Chat online with us
Email us at help@edmunds.com
*Available daily 8AM-5PM Pacific
Call us at 855-782-4711
Text us at ED411