The Honda CR-V is the second best-selling SUV in America for pretty obvious reasons. No fewer than 333,502 units were sold last year as opposed to 430,387 units of the slightly better Toyota RAV4, which is only topped by the Ram pickup, Chevrolet Silverado, and Ford F-Series.
Given these figures, we know that Ford can’t make a case for the Bronco Sport as an alternative to the CR-V. Be that as it may, the Blue Oval did exactly that in the form of a cringy video that won’t convince anyone.
The narrator starts by asking you, the viewer, if you’re looking at the CR-V as your next purchase. “Check out the Bronco Sport instead,” adds the lovely lady, which lists three reasons why the Ford Bronco Sport is better.
First of all, the Dearborn-based automaker makes a case for “available terrain management with G.O.A.T. modes.” Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t believe that prospective customers of the CR-V would be interested in Goes Over Any Type of Terrain shenanigans. Next up, the narrator sweet talks you with available best-in-class horsepower without mentioning how much the Bronco Sport Badlands trim with the 2.0-liter EcoBoost costs.
Every other grade features a three-banger turbo with 181 horsepower, an engine that falls short of the 190-horsepower turbo in the CR-V's lowliest specification. To make matters worse for the Ford Motor Company, Honda offers a four-pot motor instead of three cylinders.
Oh, and by the way, the Blue Oval tries to sell the Bronco Sport by luring customers with available trail control. For as long as I’ve been a motoring journalist, I haven’t heard of anyone that uses off-road cruise control when off-roading, be it a fellow motoring journalist or an off-road enthusiast.
In light of these details, Ford should hire better advertising people because this comparison video makes the Bronco Sport look bad. The new peeps, if they’ll ever be hired, should also focus on the details that actually matter.
For example, the CR-V offers 39.2 cubic feet (1,110 liters) of cargo space behind the second-row seats, while the Bronco Sport can’t do better than 32.5 cubic feet (920.2 liters). The Ford, which works harder to get up to speed due to its engine, also happens to be less efficient on the combined driving cycle than the CR-V at 26 versus 29 mpg (9.0 vs. 8.1 liters per 100 km).
And finally, Ford gingerly ignores the price difference between the Bronco Sport Base and the CR-V LX with optional all-wheel drive. More to the point, you’re looking at $26,820 and $26,850 before freight charges.
After a 1:43 scale model of a Ferrari 250 GTO sparked Mircea's interest for cars when he was a kid, an early internship at Top Gear sealed his career path. He's most interested in muscle cars and American trucks, but he takes a passing interest in quirky kei cars as well. Full profile
Would you like AUTOEVOLUTION to send you notifications?
Google News