• alberttcone@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    It was the Honda FRV and I still have one. I also had a Multipla. Both are good, in their own quirky ways. Both have slightly narrower seats than a normal car; the honda slightly narrower, but more supportive, have heating and are leather. Both are very car-like to drive, but the Honda has way better engines and better reliability. That said, getting parts for the FRV is a pain, because there weren’t many made and the wider body means that a surprising number aren’t shared with other Honda models if the same era.

    Given a choice, as a practical family car, I’d take the FRV over the multipla. I do have a soft spot for the multiplugly though.

    • skarn@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Both have slightly narrower seats than a normal car

      The Multipla’s seats are narrower than a normal car? Are you american?

      have heating and are leather

      I think the FRV was also a significant step up in price. That being said, I never understood what’s supposed to be good about leather seats.

      Both are very car-like to drive

      What else should they be like?

      but the Honda has way better engines and better reliability.

      The one I had was the natural gas version. It might as well have been on pedals. And the noise on the motorway, between the engine and the aerodynamics, was horrendous.That being said, we got 380000km over 19 years out of that one, so not too bad.

      That said, getting parts for the FRV is a pain, because there weren’t many made and the wider body means that a surprising number aren’t shared with other Honda models if the same era.

      Getting parts for the Multipla was pretty easy, despite the wider body most parts were somehow shared with much smaller cars, like the FIAT Brava.