Honda CR-V 2007 vs Nissan Qashqai 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.3 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Honda CR-V is more dynamic to drive. Honda CR-V engine produces 10 HP less power than Nissan Qashqai, but torque is 20 NM more than Nissan Qashqai. Despite less power, Honda CR-V reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.5 | 6.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
By specification Honda CR-V consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Qashqai, which means that by driving the Honda CR-V over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Honda CR-V consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Qashqai. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 890 km in combined cycle | 940 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 1100 km on highway | ||
| 790 km with real consumption | 910 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan Qashqai gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord, Honda FR-V | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Opel Vivaro | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Qashqai might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Nissan Qashqai 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: | 4.52 m | 4.32 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.61 m | |
|
Honda CR-V is larger. Honda CR-V is 20 cm longer than the Nissan Qashqai, 4 cm wider, while the height of Honda CR-V is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | 5 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 556 litres | 410 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 410 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 556 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
955 litres | 1520 litres | |
| The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Qashqai (by 565 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda CR-V is 0.8 metres more than that of the Nissan Qashqai, which means Honda CR-V can be harder 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): | 2`160 | 2`085 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | low | |
| Honda CR-V has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Qashqai has serious deffects in 105 percent more cases than Honda CR-V, so Honda CR-V quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5600 | 5400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.8/10 | 7.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
Nissan Qashqai has
| |