Mercedes ML 1998 vs Honda CR-V 1997
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.2 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 128 HP | |
| Torque: | 310 NM | 182 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Mercedes ML is more dynamic to drive. Mercedes ML engine produces 90 HP more power than Honda CR-V, whereas torque is 128 NM more than Honda CR-V. Thanks to more power Mercedes ML reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 13.8 | 10.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 13.6 l/100km | 9.6 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mercedes ML consumes 3.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mercedes ML could require 555 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mercedes ML consumes 4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 72 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 520 km in combined cycle | 570 km in combined cycle | |
| 640 km on highway | 670 km on highway | ||
| 520 km with real consumption | 600 km with real consumption | ||
| Honda CR-V gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 480'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Mercedes C klase, Mercedes E klase, Chrysler Crossfire | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mercedes ML might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mercedes ML engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.59 m | 4.53 m | |
| Width: | 1.83 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.68 m | |
|
Mercedes ML is larger. Mercedes ML is 6 cm longer than the Honda CR-V, 8 cm wider, while the height of Mercedes ML is 10 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 375 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 670 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mercedes ML is 1.3 metres more than that of the Honda CR-V, which means Mercedes ML can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`650 | 1`900 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 1600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes ML has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |