|
|
|
|
Value Rating
Above Average
IntelliChoice Value Rating
The chart above shows the purchase price versus ownership cost for each car from a specific vehicle class. The cars with better than average ownership cost/purchase price correlations are the best values, and these best value cars are represented by the dots below the curve. (i.e. the cars that have a lower ownership cost compared to its purchase price.) Those cars, which are worse than average or poor values, appear above the curve.
One way to view the graph is to draw a vertical line through any purchase price. You may see several dots that fall on this line - each of which is a car with a similar purchase price. However, notice the difference in ownership costs of each car represented by the vertical position of the dot. Two cars with the same purchase price can have thousands of dollars difference in ownership costs. This is what separates "good value" cars from "poor value" cars.
What is a good car value?
A "good car value" is one whose cost to own and operate is less than expected. The lower the cost to own and operate a car compared to what is expected, the better the value of that car.
But how do we know a car's "expected cost"?
For each car in the class, IntelliChoice plots the car's purchase price against the total five-year cost to own and operate it as determined by IntelliChoice research. Each dot on the above chart represents a specific car. Generally, we find that as the purchase price of the car increases, the cost to own and operate that car increases. This is why the dots on the graph tend to rise upward and to the right. This phenomenon also makes intuitive sense - as the purchase price rises, financing costs tend to rise, as do insurance, depreciation, taxes, and most other car ownership costs.
This is an important concept. It's normal for car ownership costs to rise as purchase price rises. Therefore, we can't just establish one "average" ownership cost number for each class, since cars in the class have different purchase prices. (This is why the "Relative" shown on each chart is different for cars in the same car class.)
Using statistical techniques, IntelliChoice "connects the dots" to form a curve that defines, for this car class, the relationship between the car's purchase price and car's ownership costs. This curve is our "expected cost" curve. The curve defines, for any car in the class, the five-year ownership cost that we would expect to see at each possible purchase price. If every car in the class were an average value, then all the dots would fall exactly on the curve. However, it's rare that any dot is exactly on the curve. Some dots are a little higher or lower, and some are a lot higher or lower. The dots that are a little lower are better than average car values, while the dots that are a lot lower are excellent car values (A dot that is a lot lower than the curve has ownership costs much lower than expected for a car of its purchase price). Conversely, a dot a little higher than the curve is a poorer than average car value, while a dot that is much higher than the curve is a poor car value.
Value is a relative term, not an absolute term. It is performing better than the logical expectation.
So is a Mercedes-Benz E320 expensive to own and operate? Certainly in an absolute sense. Most other cars cost less. But, when its cost to own and operate is plotted against cars with comparable invoice prices, the E320 costs less. So the E320 is not expensive to own and operate - it is a good car value. The Mercedes does not have low ownership costs, but it has low ownership costs for its invoice price.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 Honda CR-V Review
New and improved for 2007.
Driving Impressions
|
Function doesn't have to mean lack of refinement. Gauged from behind the steering wheel, and from any of the four passenger seats, for that matter, the new Honda CR-V proves this truism, if not quite to the same degree as some of the competition. Power, up 10 horsepower from the '06, is competitive, at least with others in the class powered by four-cylinder engines. The turbocharged four in the Mazda CX-7 does better, of course, as do the V6 engines becoming increasingly available for compact SUVs. All of the V6s make a minimum of 200 horsepower, some reaching into the upper 200s; the new RAV4, for instance, pumps out 269 hp, the new Kia Sorento 262 hp. Granted, they all pay a price in fuel economy, but against the 3534-pound CR-V EX-L's EPA-estimated 22/28 City/Highway miles per gallon, a 3675-pound, V6-powered RAV4 gives up but 1 mpg on the City cycle and matches the CR-V on the Highway. While hitting the gas in the CR-V won't snap any necks like some in the class aspire to, it delivers what most drivers need, if not want. And it does so reasonably smoothly, too, with less ruckus than the RAV4, although for reasons of mechanical design as much as anything, not as demurely as V6-powered alternatives.
|
|
|
The new, five-speed automatic transmission is a good match, not best in class but well above average in smoothness of shifts, in controlling hunting for the right gear when climbing grades and in holding a lower gear when helpful on downgrades. Honda's available Real Time 4WD is actually an all-wheel-drive system, not a conventional four-wheel drive, as it incorporates no lockable transfer case or ultra-low, off-road gearing. As such, it works seamlessly, invisibly allocating power to the tires slipping the least, although always favoring the default front-wheel-drive focus. All CR-Vs have Honda's Vehicle Stability Assist system, which includes traction control. This, coupled with four-wheel disc brakes, vented in front and solid in the rear, and standard ABS, brake assist and electronic brake-force distribution, help drivers maintain control in emergency maneuvers or in bad weather. In ride and handling, the new CR-V sports some encouraging tweaks in suspension geometry and component positioning. The track (the distance between wheels side to side) is wider, in front by 1.2 inches, in back by 0.8 inches. Larger wheels wear slightly fatter tires, which makes for a wider foot print where the tires touch the road. Lowering the powertrain in the body and weight-saving measures drops the center of gravity by an inch and a half. These, plus changes in steering angles, bushings and spring and shock tuning, markedly reduce body lean in cornering and dampen head toss over rough and uneven pavement. Even traversing well-aged railroad crossings at mildly elevated speeds produced no threatening sounds or gyrations. Steering assist could be backed off a notch or two, closer to that of the RAV4, which might improve directional stability and lessen the need for minor corrections in corners and long sweepers. Auditory intrusions were minimal, for the most part, and as far as tire noise, strongly correlated with pavement type and conditions. The EX-L also did the best job of insulating occupants from outside irritants. Sounds from under the hood, although low key, left no doubt the engine is a four-cylinder and that it strained at times. Moderate wind whistle leaked into the cabin from the outside mirrors and around the A-pillars. next page |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 Honda CR-V Photo Gallery
The Honda CR-V is a highly-versatile four-door entry crossover SUV with a roomy 5-passenger interior, sedan-like handling and comfort, and a reputation for offering the highest levels of standard safe...
more
|
|
|
|
|
|