Toyota Celica 1994 vs Honda CRX 1992
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 116 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 154 NM | 142 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
|
Honda CRX is a more dynamic driving. Toyota Celica engine produces 9 HP less power than Honda CRX, but torque is 12 NM more than Honda CRX. Due to the lower power, Toyota Celica reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.9 | 7.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.2 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CRX is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Toyota Celica consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CRX, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Toyota Celica could require 60 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Toyota Celica consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CRX. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 600 km in combined cycle | |
| 730 km with real consumption | 590 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota Celica gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.42 m | 4.00 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.30 m | 1.26 m | |
|
Toyota Celica is larger. Toyota Celica is 42 cm longer than the Honda CRX, 5 cm wider, while the height of Toyota Celica is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 283 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 9.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota Celica is 1.2 metres more than that of the Honda CRX, which means Toyota Celica can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`510 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Celica has
|
Honda CRX has
| |