sunsetparksteve

Hi everyone. I was looking for information on which of the following would be a more reliable/durable suv: the 1st Gen Honda CR-V with the b20 engine or the 2nd Gen Honda CR-V with the k24 engine? Thanks in advance.

ThisIsMatt

Do you currently have familiarity with either engine? I know the B-series engines much better so that's where I'd put my money, but if you are very familiar with the K-series engines then that may make all the difference.

Over-all, the gen 1 cars are very reliable. Weak parts include exhaust valves that haven't been properly adjusted over the years of ownership, motor mounts, trailing arm bushings ignition modules/coils, main relays...maybe some other stuff. Solid vehicles over-all, though kinda under-powered and especially in automatic trans orientation not very much fun to drive. I put about 105k miles on mine over the 5ish years I owned it (5-speed manual) and it was an incredible vehicle. I got through loads of snow, hauled many, many loads of cinder block and retaining wall block home from home improvement stores, plus lumber, firewood, etc...

The gen 2 cars have a timing chain, so no t-belt to worry about. In truth I prefer a belt because I always know what kind of shape the belt is in and I can replace one in just a few hours. They have very problematic AC systems, and their v-tech systems seem to be a bit problematic in the higher mileage with the different sensors and filter screens getting clogged with debris. The K engine is a lot more fun, and if you can find a 2nd gen in a 5-speed it's a damn good day. I have a whole lot less experience with these, but I wouldn't shy away from one especially if the AC was in working order (with a recently replaced compressor and other parts), or if you just don't really care about AC. Also, these are far less susceptible to rust, and in general there are a lot more out there to be had since they're just newer.

If you're a tinkerer and plan to lift/drop/modify the vehicle in any performance-oriented way, the aftermarket for the 1st gen dwarfs the 2nd gen.

To sum it up, go with the one that you're more familiar with. If that's neither and you care little about driving dynamics, a 1st gen should be both reliable and very cheap to maintain. 99-01 had a bit more power and many more 5-speeds available. However, I'd buy a clean 2nd gen over a hammered 1st gen.

Caoboy

Rear disc brakes in the second gen vs drums in the first.

Second gen has heated seats in the SE models.

Reliability-wise, maintain them and they'll both do you well.

Aftermarket is huge in the 1st Gen.

I've owned both and while the first gen is more 'honda-like' the second gen has creature comforts that make it a better daily.

sunsetparksteve

I appreciate both of your responses. I originally started the thread because Inam on the fence on whether to get a 1st gen CR-V or a 2nd gen CR-V. My biggest concern is the maintenance cost. Would one be more costly to maintain vs the other? Thanks again for your input so far.

Caoboy

Not really, at this point parts are about the same.

You dont have to change timing belts on the 2nd gen due to the chain.

You’ll have to change a coil pack vs a distributor.

All the other wear items are comparably priced. The cars are old enough that they’re cheap to own and maintain

black94sol

Having owned a 1st gen CRV, I'll chime in.

RT4WD, make sure the diff fluid was changed frequently. Only use the recommended fluid or you'll have a bad time.

Valve adjustment, make sure this is completed pretty frequently as well. The B20's are prone to burnt valves for some reason. I only say this because I ended up buying one with a bad head. Swapped over to a LS head with b20 cams. I ended up having a burnt/chipped valve on the original head with 200k.

Mine was a 2001 SE, came with leather, painted bumpers. I should of never sold it. Honestly I'd buy another one in a heart beat. Below I posted a pic for reference.

I can not speak on behalf of 2nd gen owners as far as things to watch for.