Honda CR-V 2002 vs Mercedes ML 2001
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 3.2 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 218 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 310 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 9 seconds | |
|
Mercedes ML is a more dynamic driving. Honda CR-V engine produces 68 HP less power than Mercedes ML, whereas torque is 120 NM less than Mercedes ML. Due to the lower power, Honda CR-V reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.1 | 13.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.5 l/100km | 13.6 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda CR-V consumes 4.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes ML, which means that by driving the Honda CR-V over 15,000 km in a year you can save 660 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda CR-V consumes 4.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes ML. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 83 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 630 km in combined cycle | 610 km in combined cycle | |
| 610 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 480'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mercedes ML engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord, Honda FR-V, Honda Stream | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Mercedes C klase, Mercedes E klase, Chrysler Crossfire | |
| 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: | no | yes | |
| 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: | 4.58 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.82 m | |
|
Honda CR-V is smaller. Honda CR-V is 6 cm shorter than the Mercedes ML, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Honda CR-V is 11 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 525 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
952 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda CR-V is 1.5 metres less than that of the Mercedes ML, which means Honda CR-V can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`910 | 3`365 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | low | |
| Honda CR-V has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mercedes ML has serious deffects in 115 percent more cases than Honda CR-V, so Honda CR-V quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2600 | 3400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
Mercedes ML has
| |