i'd choose the hornet also, just more fun as a daily driver and having a real automatic transmission over a CVT for long road trips would just make all the more enjoyable.
as an owner of chrysler products for 46 years with No major repairs on more than a million miles, i can tell you with confidence, that the Hornet will far exceed the life of any Honda product. A a matter of fact, my 2008 Dodge Nitro stills looks better an is probable way more reliable than most Hondas just exiting to manufacturing plant
and the Hornet will gap the CRV by several car or bus lengths every single time it's floored. Also it'll be a hoot to drive compared to a CRV any day. By dimensions, this should be compared to the HRV though, not as practical as a CRV/Escape.
The fact that the top trim CR-V Sport Touring costs $39,100 & doesn't have ventilated front seats is ridiculous. The Dodge Hornet has that an option along with multicolor ambient lighting, along with a panoramic-style sunroof & a 360 camera system (& the CR-V has none of those features)
@@jraheemjefcoat429 this is exactly why my wife decided against the CR-V, the top spec hybrid model came out to around $45k and felt so cheap and plastic-y. You can get a fully loaded Mazda CX-5 for the same price and it has every feature imaginable.
Modern cars are forgettable. Unlike classic automobiles. The 1964 chevy pickup, the early vw beetle, the 68 dodge charger, the 63 linclon continental ect.. those are timeless autos.
@Private Private Nope. Cant tell the difference. All have circle headlights and the same look. But I also get confused when people say modern cars all look the same. Outside of a brand most cars look nothing alike to me. But you can also look at cars from the 90s and 2000s and several of them do look very similar. It just depends on the decade.
@@cantloop9589 for real. People have no clue that manufacturers use the CVT for cost cutting instead of using a proper transmission. So many nice vehicles I had to take off my buying list just for having a CVT transmission. 😐
I'm not a big fan of the Neanderthal brow that sits below the rear window on the new CR-V. The CR-V has had issues with rear design since forever. The Iron Man look for the previous generation was almost a step up, but this new design is probably as bad as the bulging head look of a few generations prior.
Im tired of the push toward futuristic looking cars, because futurism staying isnt enough. Cars are still basic machine when you beeqj thrm down. No need for these halo lights, massive grills, gaudy wheels. Bring back 40s- 60s styling, until then, cars will continue to look pretentious.
I personally don't care for the front end of Alpha Romeos. That triangular grill is hideous. The Hornet look way better. Just too overpriced for a compact SUV.
I'm sorry-give me the Hornet. Every single CR-V I've seen so far just looks really cheap and ugly to me. I thought it looked more like what the HR-V should look like and the HR-V looks like what the CR-V should look like.
IMO, it looks like the 4th gen Pilot from the front. The 3rd gen had styling reminiscent of its family members such as the 9th generation Accord, 10th generation Civic and 2nd generation Ridgeline (pre-facelift).
In my opinion I respect Dodge for creating one of the most iconic musle cars from the 60s and 70s like the '69 charger and '70 challenger and also their modern muscle cars like the challenger demon and charger hellcat. That's include the viper as well.
The front of the Hornet remembers me the front of the Fiat Bravo from '95. The front was too narrow, but the rest was quite gorgeous; well advanced in time.
You also can get the CRV as a hybrid.. So as far as everyday driver, its a better choice. Hornet will give better performance. Rather get a performance hatch with that kind of power.
Even though I like Dodge, I'm going to stick with Honda. Honda's will last forever. Dodge will not last forever. Since Dodge is a Stellantis product and is associated with Chrysler. Chrysler has a bad reputation with their cars, as they break down all the time and they're made very cheaply.
do you talk from experience or just repeat what some people say, people that have never owned a Chrysler product. As for Hondas lasting forever, well if you can drive a honda past 7 years you are the luckiest man on the earth.
I own a 2013 Chrysler 300S AWD with the 3.6L Pentastar v6 that I bought new. In the ten years I’ve owned it I’ve never had a problem with it. I’ve owned several other brands including several other Chrysler vehicles over the years (I’m 71 years old) and I can truthfully say that the worst vehicles for quality build I’ve owned were the GM vehicles. I doubt very much if I’ll ever purchase another GM.
The Hornet is just an attempt to fill a gap, as an Alfa Tonale it works fine no questions, it’s a brand thing that just clicks, but as a Dodge, that’s a no from me. Reminds me of the Mexican version of the Journey, it has the badges and stickers but underneath it’s just a Chinese brand low powered thing.
![[UA] NAVI проти G2 Esports | Blast Premier Fall Final](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QWlIm4FGESQ/mqdefault.jpg)
The dodge is litterly an Alfa Romeo Tonale with a different face Lmao
Also the difference is that the hornet grew up in Detroit and the tonale grew up in Milan, Italy
Toe nail
Looks just as American as the Dodge Durango. Very similar design.
Wouldn't the HR-V be more in line with the Hornet's size?
Yes it would
I’m not a previous Dodge customer, but I prefer the Hornet in this comparison. Looks like a cool little CUV to me.
I've owned 3 Dodges...the last two I got rid of for a Toyota and a Honda. You couldn't pay me to drive another Dodge. Sticking with Lexus/ Toyota
i'd choose the hornet also, just more fun as a daily driver and having a real automatic transmission over a CVT for long road trips would just make all the more enjoyable.
CRV will last double or even triple the life of a Hornet.
as an owner of chrysler products for 46 years with No major repairs on more than a million miles, i can tell you with confidence, that the Hornet will far exceed the life of any Honda product. A a matter of fact, my 2008 Dodge Nitro stills looks better an is probable way more reliable than most Hondas just exiting to manufacturing plant
and the Hornet will gap the CRV by several car or bus lengths every single time it's floored. Also it'll be a hoot to drive compared to a CRV any day. By dimensions, this should be compared to the HRV though, not as practical as a CRV/Escape.
I doubt that
CRV will last longer!??..lol...sure😂 if you say so😅
My friends hade one 100000 km.transmission fail yes pure crap they use to be good not annymore
The Tonale isn't 10k more expensive. The Tonale only comes in PHEV in USA, so is only 2K more.
You're correct.
I'm confused I thought this video was about comparing the hornet to the CR-V
The fact that the top trim CR-V Sport Touring costs $39,100 & doesn't have ventilated front seats is ridiculous. The Dodge Hornet has that an option along with multicolor ambient lighting, along with a panoramic-style sunroof & a 360 camera system (& the CR-V has none of those features)
Ig they're reserving that for Acura
The rdx has that.
I'm so sick of "Honda reserving that for Acura" excuse! You don't see other brands reserving luxury features only for their luxury brands.
@@jraheemjefcoat429 this is exactly why my wife decided against the CR-V, the top spec hybrid model came out to around $45k and felt so cheap and plastic-y. You can get a fully loaded Mazda CX-5 for the same price and it has every feature imaginable.
Modern cars are forgettable.
Unlike classic automobiles.
The 1964 chevy pickup, the early vw beetle, the 68 dodge charger, the 63 linclon continental ect.. those are timeless autos.
I really really struggle to tell the difference between old cars.
It is fair however to say once you see one car from a brand, you seen it all.
@@baronvonjo1929 really? I think you must be no older than 30s. Because pre 80s cars are easy to tell apart.
@Private Private Nope. Cant tell the difference. All have circle headlights and the same look.
But I also get confused when people say modern cars all look the same. Outside of a brand most cars look nothing alike to me.
But you can also look at cars from the 90s and 2000s and several of them do look very similar.
It just depends on the decade.
Jesus why they use all of cool names for shitty suvs.. :/ Eclpise, Mustang, Dart nowr Hornet. They even used logo of Hornet :(
I respect both Dodge and Honda.
The CRV looks like it copied VW Tiguan's homework.
I’m glad someone else noticed.
i can’t see it
@@Bruhngus420 side profile
The Hornet's front end looks pretty much like the 8th generation Mitsubishi Galant.
Cr-V blows it out the water in every dept except the powertrain...but that's so much better than the Honda's lol. I understand
But the trade-off is the CR-V is about 25% more fuel efficient.
@@r7calvin but most people who care about engine power and driving dynamics care much about fuel consumption.
in what world 😂. cvt’s are terrible, the crv’s engine is uninspired, and the crv is agly af
@@cantloop9589 for real. People have no clue that manufacturers use the CVT for cost cutting instead of using a proper transmission. So many nice vehicles I had to take off my buying list just for having a CVT transmission. 😐
I'm not a big fan of the Neanderthal brow that sits below the rear window on the new CR-V. The CR-V has had issues with rear design since forever. The Iron Man look for the previous generation was almost a step up, but this new design is probably as bad as the bulging head look of a few generations prior.
Im tired of the push toward futuristic looking cars, because futurism staying isnt enough. Cars are still basic machine when you beeqj thrm down. No need for these halo lights, massive grills, gaudy wheels.
Bring back 40s- 60s styling, until then, cars will continue to look pretentious.
I personally don't care for the front end of Alpha Romeos. That triangular grill is hideous. The Hornet look way better. Just too overpriced for a compact SUV.
I'm sorry-give me the Hornet. Every single CR-V I've seen so far just looks really cheap and ugly to me. I thought it looked more like what the HR-V should look like and the HR-V looks like what the CR-V should look like.
you do know that the dodge hornet is a rebadge alfa Romeo tonale so, I wouldn't say its all dodges design.
The dodge is litterly an Alfa Romeo Tonale with a different face Lmao
@@Felice_B exactly
@@Felice_B Copy and paste comment
@@MikoLanthierFrechette I didn’t know that
Definitely the hornet for 5yrs
This guy doesn't know how the CRV always had that "Volvo" design taillights?
For me the 2023 CR-V kinda looks like a third gen pilot
IMO, it looks like the 4th gen Pilot from the front. The 3rd gen had styling reminiscent of its family members such as the 9th generation Accord, 10th generation Civic and 2nd generation Ridgeline (pre-facelift).
Dumb question. The Honda will last way longer and hold more value without a doubt.
It’s the CR-V in an instant. It’s funny to me that a Honda looks more confident, imposing, and powerful than a Dodge but here we are.
Honda just brought back the CR-V LX (base trim), so you could still get a CR-V for less than $28k.
Only Dodge I have respect for is their RAM Trucks.
In my opinion I respect Dodge for creating one of the most iconic musle cars from the 60s and 70s like the '69 charger and '70 challenger and also their modern muscle cars like the challenger demon and charger hellcat. That's include the viper as well.
Honda stole the rear light design from Volvo. PASS
That was a good useful comparison
Tonale and Hornet are virtually identical.
That’s because they’re the same vehicle.
What Dodge ? I see Alfa Romeo
The Hornet is like a disposable Bic Lighter.
The front of the Hornet remembers me the front of the Fiat Bravo from '95. The front was too narrow, but the rest was quite gorgeous; well advanced in time.
Actually I’m glad you pointed it out. But I always liked the rear lights from Brava.
The Hornet & Tonale do not share powertrains.
Hornet is better looking than the Alfa Romeo imo.
The Hornet has better tech and a stronger engine than the CRV. The CRV is larger and far more economical. Both are a great ride.
They really should have designed the front and rear to look similar to the Alfa. It’s far more bland and the biggest letdown
Neither SUV's are perfect when it comes to there reliability but they look good.
True but the CRV will outlast the dodge/alpha
@@MC4D. True.
Heey....look at dodge hornet.., its more like 2023 honda HRV USDM body shape...
Ummmm well they’re not really in the same class of vehicle and the Hornet is ugly and definitely unreliable sooo
The HR-V looks like a BMW from behind and something else from the front.
If this had the ZF 8 Speed instead of the 9, it would be a bargain at $29,000.
Take that Hornet out back with a sawed off and end its misery.
I’m waiting for the redesigned Alfa Romeo stelvio.
Do you have a Ramcharger sketch video?
I'll take the CRV over a cheap poorly conceived rebadge.
You also can get the CRV as a hybrid.. So as far as everyday driver, its a better choice. Hornet will give better performance. Rather get a performance hatch with that kind of power.
The Hornet RT is a hybrid.
Where is the hornet?
Even though I like Dodge, I'm going to stick with Honda. Honda's will last forever. Dodge will not last forever. Since Dodge is a Stellantis product and is associated with Chrysler. Chrysler has a bad reputation with their cars, as they break down all the time and they're made very cheaply.
do you talk from experience or just repeat what some people say, people that have never owned a Chrysler product. As for Hondas lasting forever, well if you can drive a honda past 7 years you are the luckiest man on the earth.
I own a 2013 Chrysler 300S AWD with the 3.6L Pentastar v6 that I bought new. In the ten years I’ve owned it I’ve never had a problem with it. I’ve owned several other brands including several other Chrysler vehicles over the years (I’m 71 years old) and I can truthfully say that the worst vehicles for quality build I’ve owned were the GM vehicles. I doubt very much if I’ll ever purchase another GM.
It's not 1980's any more. These days, Honda makes crap as well. haha.
If you want it to fetch a good price when you sell it used, then the answer is Honda CRV.
Niether
That's one ugly alfa I mean dodge
The Hornet is just an attempt to fill a gap, as an Alfa Tonale it works fine no questions, it’s a brand thing that just clicks, but as a Dodge, that’s a no from me.
Reminds me of the Mexican version of the Journey, it has the badges and stickers but underneath it’s just a Chinese brand low powered thing.
Bigger version of this SUV will be called Viper. It will have a Viper logo that will work as stoplight. True succesor to the old Viper :D
Agreed, it looks like the crossover version of the Dodge Dart in an attempt to boost sales lacking in the sedan segment.
CRV for Honda reliability, Hornet for looks, but CRV is the way to go all in all, it just makes more sence, especially as a Crossover
You're blind
This gen crv looks better than the hornet by a long shot. Hornet looks like a bubble.
Crv is not reliable, engine problems are commun
the “Dodge” looks dated, like an older kia
That Hornet headlights are actually offered on Tonale in europe,on cheaper versions.
honda