[MUSIC PLAYING]
Hi, and welcome back.
I'm Mike Quincy.
I'm Ryan Pszczolkowski.
And I'm Alex Knizek.
So as Talking Cars podcast viewers and listeners know,
we test a lot of crazy cars here at the track.
We've got hands-free driving assist features, all the latest
EVs, you name it.
But sometimes we need to have a wake up call
and talk about vehicles that are a touch more, shall we say,
realistic, which brings us to the car
that we're going to talk about today, the 2023 Honda HR-V.
This is the second-generation HR-V,
replacing a little loved version, which was based
on the Honda Fit subcompact.
It had responsive handling, but its 141-horsepower engine
was completely outmatched.
But it did deliver about 29 miles per gallon overall.
So I was completely prepared to be
underwhelmed with this new one.
But I'm going to kind of throw it to Alex and say,
what did you-- what did you think?
Yeah, so I actually haven't had any experience
with the older car.
So I'm coming into this HR-V just--
this is my first time with it.
So I found it to be a totally competent, pleasant subcompact
crossover.
And I the original HR-V kind of had some oddities with it,
maybe even unloved as you mentioned there, Mike.
But this just kind of felt like a mini CR-V to me.
It was so normal in so many ways.
But that's a good thing, right?
It kind of just serves its purpose
really well, comfortable.
And yeah, I just thought it was really good.
And I think it'll--
maybe the HR-V as it stands now is kind of mid-pack
as far as our ratings of subcompact crossovers go.
I could see this being elevated a little bit.
Maybe it's not a complete knock out
of the park number one out of the category,
but certainly better than the outgoing version.
And so this is going to compete with things
like the Chevrolet Trailblazer, the Mazda CX-30, Hyundai Kona.
And most recently we tested the Toyota Corolla Cross,
which is kind of using the Corolla name,
but again, small compact--
subcompact-- crossover.
And so I personally-- with that in mind,
I was more impressed with the HR-V
than I was with the Corolla Cross.
So thankfully, this new HR-V is based
on the redesigned Honda Civic platform, which
brings a longer wheelbase.
It's more powerful.
It's got 158 horsepower, which is a good bump up.
It's hooked up to a continuously variable transmission.
And it also gets an independent rear suspension.
We bought an all-wheel drive Sport model, no options outside
of the Nordic forest paint.
The bottom line is $28,790.
So Honda's mission here--
affordable, fuel efficient, probably reliable, safe.
Ryan, what do you think?
Fantastic.
Ah.
Wow.
You know, you said it earlier, I mean
it's a breath of fresh air.
Sometimes we drive these cars that
make us want to go nuts because the controls are overwhelming.
They might look nice and be fancy,
but they're just not easy to get in and go kind of cars.
And this is a get in and go kind of car.
It's nice and easy to drive.
It's got a normal shifter.
I thought it was great.
I mean, I think back at the old HR-V,
and I don't have very good thoughts at all.
I mean, it was very-- it was tinny.
It was underpowered, so you were constantly
whining the motor out.
It was loud.
It was obnoxious.
We've hammered that enough already.
But this, getting into it, I was--
I guess I wasn't expecting a lot.
I had overheard a few people say they were
pleasantly surprised by it.
So I was optimistic a little bit.
And it even surpassed those optimistic expectations
I had because it was so bad before.
I think it rides quite well.
It's a little firm, but it's really not bad.
I mean, I think it does a nice little job dampening
and just keep controlling the body while you're driving.
The steering's got a nice weight to it.
It turns in well.
It's just a nice car to just get in and go.
And the thing I think I noticed the most was it
feels substantial.
And I talk about this sometimes.
It doesn't-- some of these cheaper cars--
I'm going to call it cheaper.
$28,790 is a lot of money.
I totally get it.
But that is cheap by today's standard,
right, especially for a smaller SUV that has four doors
and is as nice as this one, right?
It's a nice value.
I think it's a fantastic value.
If the car has-- it really didn't let me down.
The controls are fairly simple.
The screen had a little delay, I thought.
Going through some of the menus, it kind of was a little slow.
But it's simple.
It's still very simple.
You absolutely hit on it.
I mean, my notes--
sorry-- simple controls.
And what also surprised me was the interior.
I mean, a number of padded surfaces, exposed stitching,
nice switchgear.
Yeah, and this is the mid-level, right?
It's not the base, but it's also not the most expensive one
you can get.
And again, I'll bring up the Corolla Cross
just as kind of a--
and not to beat on it too much, but that car, you get in,
and you're kind of like, OK, this feels a little bit--
phoned in might be aggressive, but just very plasticky.
And things just fit together OK, and not really much
design to it, I guess.
Whereas in this HR-V, the center console kind of
has a really cool design to it.
And like you said, it's padded.
It has some accent stitching on it.
The seats had a unique texture and kind of pattern.
Yeah, so-- and then of course, the switchgear that comes over
from the Civic that was really nice in the Civic
is also really nice here.
So I don't know, it works out to be quite a nice package.
It brought me back a little bit to more of what
I'll call a classic Honda.
It's just simple, right?
And I keep going back to the value in that--
the feel of this car.
It has that heft to it.
Like if you get in--
and I'm not comparing apples and apples here.
But like, when you get in a BMW and you shut the door,
it's like, OK, I'm in a nicer car.
This, for the money, I thought was a step above, certainly,
the Corolla Cross.
And honestly, looking at that list of all the competitors,
I pick this already.
This is-- of all the ones you listed, I pick this one already
over them.
I put about 100 miles on it, and I was happy the whole time.
And it brings up a nice, pleasant, friendly reminder.
One of the most frequently asked questions
that we get is, how do you decide
what trim levels to test?
And in our test program, we ask the manufacturers.
We do some research.
We find out what is the most mainstream, what is the volume
leader for trim level.
And in this case, for the HR-V, it's the Sport.
So that's why.
Occasionally we get to rent other trim lines
from manufacturers to get an idea of what the--
it's almost always a higher trim.
But so it kind of puts our test car in perspective.
And it is a lot of value for the money.
In terms of driving it, I thought
the engine was pretty adequate for cruising.
If you're just on the highway with the cruise control on,
it's OK.
When you need to dip into it, when you need to boot it,
then it gets a little noisy.
You kind of show the limits of this 158 horsepower.
But again, for kind of normal day to day, Ryan,
I'm totally with you.
This is a really, really easy car.
You almost can't complain about the power in a sense that
it's--
they got to trim some stuff out here or there, right?
And I thought it did a great job.
When you're merging and you stomp on it,
sure, the CVT whines out, and the motor revs, and that's it,
whatever.
But in day to day driving, I was very happy with it.
It makes it-- sorry, go ahead, Alex.
I was just going to say, I'll be a nerd real quick.
I actually looked at the power to weight ratio
of the old one versus this one.
Because the old one was so slower-- well,
you guys are telling me it was.
So the old one-- and this is using our data
when-- we weigh all our cars when we buy them.
So it's not just a manufacturer spec.
So the old one that we bought was 3,044 pounds,
and it had 144--
or 141 horsepower.
So that means it's got 21.6 pounds to move
for every horsepower it has.
This new one, it gained 235 pounds.
So it weighs 3,279 pounds, ours does.
But it has more power, the 158 you mentioned.
So that gets 20.8 pounds per horsepower.
So it is a little bit faster.
It's certainly not going to blow the doors off anything.
But there's some improvement there,
even though it gained a little weight.
Yeah, it feels better though.
The way its tuned it feels better.
It's really smooth.
Yeah, exactly.
Yeah.
And the reason why super producer Dave
Abrams allows us to do this podcast
is because we are nerds.
But I love it.
This is-- you guys are my people.
It makes me think how much better this HR-V is, maybe
Honda did take to heart our criticisms of the last version.
A lot of publishers tested that HR-V
and probably came to the same conclusions.
So they're like, hmm, OK, we got to work on this.
And I really think they did do their homework
on this redesigned model.
And just a reminder, these are just our first impressions.
We haven't done our full testing yet,
but it will be available soon.
So definitely check back with consumerreports.org
for more updates on the HR-V to get our full test results.
And I'm going to--
I'm going to kind of wrap this segment up
unless you guys have anything more to say
about this little Honda.
Do you miss the magic seat of the first one?
The folding rear seat, that was kind of its unique selling
proposition, right, is that that rear bench,
I think it could fold up or something.
Because they mounted the fuel tank somewhere else.
So you could end up with this crazy storage space
for how small the car was.
Yeah, I don't remember, and I don't miss it.
I didn't even pay attention I was so
disgusted with that car, yeah.
No, it's funny, Alex, I'm glad you brought that up.
Because I was looking at the digital logbook
of our current HR-V. And I completely forgot about that.
That's funny.
OK.
But again, I'm with Ryan.
The car-- the first version was so incredibly
painful to drive that I wanted to erase it
all from my memories.
I'd be interested to hear from people who own it whether they
use that feature or not.
I know.
I say hats off to Honda.
I mean, here's another small SUV that I'll
recommend to people assuming it doesn't
have a disastrous reliability history.
Right.
All right.
Well, we'll have more as we rack up the miles
and do our testing.
And great discussion on this little car.
And if you're in the market for a small subcompact SUV,
might want to put this on your short list, which brings us
to our question of the day.
We love your questions.
Text 32nd videos.
Send them all to TalkingCars@icloud.com.
That's TalkingCars@icloud.com.
And we're really lucky because we have a video question today.
This is Ned.
Hey Talking Cars, I want to hark back
on the previous week's episode regarding the Acura Integra.
I would like to know your guys' thoughts on the Mazda 3
Turbo versus the Acura Integra and which
one you guys would pick.
Because in my mind, the Acura Integra and the Mazda 3
are actually more in relation to one
another than versus like a Audi A3 or BMW 2 Series.
But anyways, the Mazda 3, to me, seems like a better buy.
Because for the same price or less,
depending on configuration, you get
more power, all-wheel drive.
You can get it as a sedan or a hatchback.
You get arguably better styling inside and out, in my opinion.
But yeah, I definitely would like
to know your guys' thoughts on that, specifically
Ryan's opinion.
Because I feel like him and I are probably in the same age
demographic.
But yeah, looking forward to your guys' opinion on that.
Keep up the good work.
Thanks.
So this was a really fun question.
Mazda 3 Turbo versus an Acura Integra?
Oh, this is going to be--
I just know this is going to be great.
And Ryan, he specifically called you out.
I know, I feel pressure.
I think you guys are bros now.
Careful what you say.
What are your thoughts on this?
So it's actually kind of an--
excuse me.
It's kind of an easy one for me.
I would pick the Mazda 3 Turbo.
I mean, he even mentions it.
I think it would be a better value.
The regular Mazda 3-- we didn't test the Turbo, but we--
it's practical.
Now this Mazda 3 Turbo, you can get it all-wheel drive.
You can get it in the hatch, sedan, whatever.
I would get in the hatch with all-wheel drive.
That's right up my alley.
The Integra-- I am sorry, the Integra, it's a nice car.
And don't get me wrong, it's got that sporty feel to it.
But the Mazda 3, that's a hard--
that's a hard one to beat, I think.
A hard one to pass up, huh?
Yeah, I really do.
All right.
Alex?
Yeah I'm not going to--
I'm not really going to argue Ryan.
I love this question.
Because you think, naturally, the Integra
might be Audi A3, BMW 2 Series, the front-wheel drive coupe
one.
But it's not so obvious, it's kind of nuanced,
but Mazda's going for that more premium interior
lately with a little bit more premium experience
for kind of a lower cost.
So I think it's an awesome comparison.
But yeah, I would probably gravitate
towards the Mazda myself.
Actually, I went back and looked at my notes from that car.
And I wrote something about not wanting
to give that car back, which I'll admit,
doesn't really happen all that often.
But I think the big decision here
is whether you want the turbo engine
with the manual transmission that you
can get with the Integra or if you want the all-wheel drive
with the Mazda, right?
Because you can't get the man-- or the turbo Mazda plus manual.
They won't let you do that.
So you can get the all-wheel drive, which is great.
Dude, you're breaking the rules right now.
You're bringing in--
Why?
Because you're bringing in a different car.
He specifically said Mazda 3 Turbo versus the Integra.
Yeah, that's what I'm saying.
So you got it-- if you want the Mazda turbo,
then you can't have the manual, right, where
you could with the Integra.
So I'm saying that choice--
you have to make that choice.
He didn't really specify whether he was into the manual or not.
And I also would go with a hatch, Ryan, for sure.
It's more practical, yeah.
Yeah, the Mazda gives you a lot more choices too,
whether you go with the hatch, or a sedan, or all
those things.
Sure.
Yeah.
Well, it would be a boring podcast if we all agreed,
so I'm going to completely disagree with both you guys.
I priced out a top trim Mazda 3 Turbo, the 2.5 Turbo premium
plus.
Came in to about $36,410 versus $37,395 for the Acura
A-spec with the technology.
So it's less than $1,000.
Now I can understand your perception of Acura
and competing with maybe BMW, and Audi, and stuff like that.
But when you look at the price of a top level Mazda 3 Turbo,
it's pretty darn close to Acura.
So maybe we take the perceptions of what a luxury car or luxury
brand is supposed to be and just throw it out the window.
But for me, I'm going with the Acura Integra because
of the manual transmission.
That's it, hard stop.
That is the deal here.
No that-- listen, Ned, this is the vehicle guide.
Don't listen to these other guys.
I mean, definitely go with the-- go with the Acura.
We're always on a mission to save the manual transmissions.
Honda makes a great one.
The manual shifter in our tested Honda Civic Si is really good.
Full disclosure, I did have a 1993 Acura Integra
with the manual, and I loved that car.
I love this one.
I don't think the Acura Integra gets as much love as it should.
But there's absolutely no question in my mind that
the car of this little contest, definitely,
you've got to award the Acura Integra the A+.
Put it on the top of your list.
Yeah, and another benefit of going with the Integra is
if you do get that top level with the manual,
you get the adaptive shocks, which kind of
helps one of the problems with that car in its standard form
is the ride is just--
it's OK.
It's a little stiff.
It beats you up a little.
It helps to mitigate it.
It doesn't fix it.
It doesn't fix it, it just makes it a little better, yeah,
exactly.
Right.
And I do agree that-- with you guys what you said.
The interiors of the Mazda 3 is really nice.
It's really nice for how much you're getting.
I will kind of give you guys a subtle reminder
that the controls for the Mazda 3 are still pretty bad.
That central controller is kind of lousy.
And I know I spent a lot of time in our Acura Integra, which
is not the top of the line.
But by far, the controls in the new Integra, in my opinion,
are much better than the Mazda's.
So that's another feather in the cap of the Acura.
And looking at the numbers, the performance numbers,
probably going to be very similar in terms of horsepower,
0 to 60 timing, fuel economy.
Kind of a wash.
But like I said, I thought this question was awesome.
I think it's a great discussion.
I'm glad that there are cars like this that are still
available to the consumer.
And I applaud any automaker that continues
to make smallish sporty cars, and definitely
ones with manual transmissions.
Absolutely.
I think we're going to put the wraps
on this particular podcast.
Just a subtle reminder, this podcast
was expertly produced by super producer Dave Abrams,
incredibly expertly edited by Andrew Belize.
These guys are the best in the business.
We're lucky to have them.
So always check the show notes if you
want more information on the vehicles and the topics
that we discussed.
Just a reminder, keep your questions
coming, TalkingCars@icloud.com.
That's TalkingCars@icloud.com.
Thanks so much for tuning in.
And we'll see you next week.
[MUSIC PLAYING]