BMW X3 2006 vs Honda CR-V 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 500 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.7 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
BMW X3 is more dynamic to drive. BMW X3 engine produces 68 HP more power than Honda CR-V, whereas torque is 150 NM more than Honda CR-V. Thanks to more power BMW X3 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 7.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.9 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW X3 consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW X3 could require 45 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW X3 consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 67 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 870 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 1040 km on highway | 930 km on highway | ||
| 750 km with real consumption | 710 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 330'000 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 BMW X3 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW X5, BMW X6 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord | |
| 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: | yes | no | |
| 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: | 4.57 m | 4.53 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.67 m | 1.68 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. BMW X3 is 5 cm longer than the Honda CR-V, 3 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 480 litres | 524 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1560 litres | no data | |
|
Honda CR-V has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, BMW X3 has 44 litres less trunk space than the Honda CR-V. This could mean that the BMW X3 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW X3 is 0.2 metres more than that of the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`355 | 2`160 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Honda CR-V has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW X3 has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Honda CR-V, so Honda CR-V quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6800 | 8600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW X3 has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |