Honda CR-V 2004 vs BMW X3 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 177 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
|
BMW X3 is a more dynamic driving. Honda CR-V engine produces 37 HP less power than BMW X3, whereas torque is 10 NM less than BMW X3. Due to the lower power, Honda CR-V reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 6.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.5 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
| By specification Honda CR-V consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Honda CR-V could require 30 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 67 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 860 km in combined cycle | 1030 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 1210 km on highway | ||
| 770 km with real consumption | 890 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 17 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord, Honda FR-V | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 1 sērija, BMW X1 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW X3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The BMW X3 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: | 4.64 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.67 m | |
| Honda CR-V is 7 cm longer than the BMW X3, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Honda CR-V is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 525 litres | 480 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
952 litres | 1560 litres | |
| Honda CR-V has 45 litres more trunk space than the BMW X3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in BMW X3 (by 608 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda CR-V is 1.4 metres less than that of the BMW X3, which means Honda CR-V can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`265 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Honda CR-V has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW X3 has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Honda CR-V, so Honda CR-V quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3200 | 6800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
BMW X3 has
| |