Honda CR-V 2010 vs Toyota RAV4 2011
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 10.8 seconds | |
|
Honda CR-V is more dynamic to drive. Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV4 have the same engine power, but Honda CR-V torque is 10 NM more than Toyota RAV4. Honda CR-V reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 8.8 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Honda CR-V consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota RAV4, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Honda CR-V could require 30 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Honda CR-V consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota RAV4. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 780 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 930 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Honda CR-V 2010: Car features Honda`s real-time four-wheel-drive system, which sends torque to the front wheels under normal conditions. A multi-plate clutch transfers torque to the rear axle when wheel slip is identified (pressure is provided to the clutch by a dual-pump system). To allow ABS to work seamlessly, the clutch is also disengaged during braking. Toyota RAV4 2010: It has proactive automatic all-wheel drive and acts as front-wheel drive under normal conditions. In the event of wheel slip, torque is transferred to the rear wheels via an electronically controlled multi-plate clutch. The clutch can also be locked manually using a button on the console. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Corolla Verso, Toyota Verso | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota RAV4 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Toyota RAV4 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: | 4.53 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.86 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.69 m | |
| Honda CR-V is 16 cm longer than the Toyota RAV4, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Honda CR-V is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 524 litres | 586 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1752 litres | |
|
Toyota RAV4 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Honda CR-V has 62 litres less trunk space than the Toyota RAV4. This could mean that the Honda CR-V uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda CR-V is 0.2 metres more than that of the Toyota RAV4. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`160 | 2`190 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Honda CR-V has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Toyota RAV4 has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Honda CR-V, so Honda CR-V quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8600 | 9800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
Toyota RAV4 has
| |