Honda CR-V 2004 vs Opel Antara 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| 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: | 140 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 10.3 seconds | |
|
Opel Antara is a more dynamic driving. Honda CR-V engine produces 10 HP less power than Opel Antara, but torque is 20 NM more than Opel Antara. Due to the lower power, Honda CR-V reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 7.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.5 l/100km | 9.0 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda CR-V consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Antara, which means that by driving the Honda CR-V over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda CR-V consumes 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Antara. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 860 km in combined cycle | 860 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 950 km on highway | ||
| 770 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 530'000 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 Opel Antara engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord, Honda FR-V | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Chevrolet Captiva, Chevrolet Epica, Chevrolet Cruze | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Honda CR-V might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Opel Antara 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 | 4.58 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.70 m | |
| Honda CR-V is 6 cm longer than the Opel Antara, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Honda CR-V is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 525 litres | 370 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
952 litres | 1420 litres | |
| Honda CR-V has 155 litres more trunk space than the Opel Antara. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Opel Antara (by 468 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 12.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda CR-V is 1.8 metres less than that of the Opel Antara, which means Honda CR-V can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`225 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | Opel Antara has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Honda CR-V has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Opel Antara, so Opel Antara quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 3200 | 5000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.4/10 | 7.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
Opel Antara has
| |