BMW X5 2003 vs Honda CR-V 2004
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 500 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.8 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
BMW X5 is more dynamic to drive. BMW X5 engine produces 78 HP more power than Honda CR-V, whereas torque is 160 NM more than Honda CR-V. Thanks to more power BMW X5 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 | 6.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.5 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW X5 consumes 2.7 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 X5 could require 405 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW X5 consumes 3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 93 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 980 km in combined cycle | 860 km in combined cycle | |
| 1160 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 880 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X5 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 | 350'000 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 X5 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW X3, BMW X6 | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord, Honda FR-V | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW X5 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The BMW X5 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: | 4.67 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.87 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.71 m | |
|
BMW X5 is larger. BMW X5 is 3 cm longer than the Honda CR-V, 9 cm wider, while the height of BMW X5 is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 465 litres | 525 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1550 litres | 952 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, BMW X5 has 60 litres less trunk space than the Honda CR-V. This could mean that the BMW X5 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in BMW X5 (by 598 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW X5 is 1.4 metres more than that of the Honda CR-V, which means BMW X5 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`695 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Honda CR-V has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW X5 has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than Honda CR-V, so Honda CR-V quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5400 | 3200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.5/10 | 8.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW X5 has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |