Compared with my previous vehicle, a 2004 Honda CR-V, the 2013 is VERY disappointing in all aspects EXCEPT fuel economy.
Awesome fuel economy.
With the ECO button activated and reasonable acceleration I get 33-34 miles per gallon highway driving and around 27 mpg in city traffic.
A few neat technological gimmics.
They are NOT necessary and I would not pay extra for them if they were sold separately.
There are two Âfuel economyÂ meters.
One provides your mpg, as you drive, in a numerical readout in the middle of your speedometer.
The other is a color lighting system surrounding the speedometer.
You can make a ÂgameÂ of trying to keep the color fully green, which is optimum for fuel economy.
GREAT rear storage capacity, heated front seats, fog lights and a backup camera.
Since my 2004 model, the body and notably the rear have been redesigned resulting in a SERIOUS safety hazard - reduced rear mirror vision and serious side blind areas.
Loss of front leg room.
Poor seating design.
Poorly placed, poorly designed subwoofer.
Center console instead of far superior fold down table.
Loss of multiple CD changer.
Luxury HVAC system is awful.
I had many more comments and details, but there is inadequate space here for them.
Summary - if you has the old design of CR-V, like my 2004 model, you will NOT be happy with the 2013 except for fuel economy!
† Edmunds.com received the highest numerical score in the proprietary J.D. Power 2014 Third-Party Automotive Website Evaluation Study℠. Results based on responses from 3,381 responses, measuring 14 companies and measures third-party automotive website usefulness among new and used vehicle shoppers. Proprietary study results are based on experiences and perceptions of owners surveyed from January 2014. Your experiences may vary. Visit jdpower.com.