Citroen C-Crosser 2007 vs Honda CR-V 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 156 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 10.3 seconds | |
|
Citroen C-Crosser is more dynamic to drive. Citroen C-Crosser engine produces 16 HP more power than Honda CR-V, whereas torque is 40 NM more than Honda CR-V. Thanks to more power Citroen C-Crosser reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 6.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen C-Crosser consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen C-Crosser could require 105 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen C-Crosser consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 890 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 740 km with real consumption | 790 km with real consumption | ||
| Honda CR-V gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Honda CR-V 2007: 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 detected (pressure is applied to the clutch by a dual-pump system). To allow ABS to work smoothly, the clutch is also disengaged during braking. | |||
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 Citroen C-Crosser engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mitsubishi Outlander, Peugeot 4007 | 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. Honda CR-V might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Citroen C-Crosser 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: | 4.65 m | 4.52 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.67 m | 1.68 m | |
| Citroen C-Crosser is 13 cm longer than the Honda CR-V, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Citroen C-Crosser is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | 5 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 184 litres | 556 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 184 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 441 litres | 556 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1686 litres | 955 litres | |
| In 5-seat version Honda CR-V has more luggage space (by 115 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Citroen C-Crosser (by 731 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen C-Crosser is 0.2 metres more than that of the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`410 | 2`160 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 6400 | 5800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen C-Crosser has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |