Honda CRX 1992 vs Toyota Celica 1994
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 175 HP | |
| Torque: | 142 NM | 186 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.3 seconds | 8.1 seconds | |
|
Toyota Celica is a more dynamic driving. Honda CRX engine produces 50 HP less power than Toyota Celica, whereas torque is 44 NM less than Toyota Celica. Due to the lower power, Honda CRX reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.5 | 9.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 8.9 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CRX is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda CRX consumes 1.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica, which means that by driving the Honda CRX over 15,000 km in a year you can save 240 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda CRX consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 600 km in combined cycle | 650 km in combined cycle | |
| 590 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota Celica gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.00 m | 4.42 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.26 m | 1.30 m | |
|
Honda CRX is smaller. Honda CRX is 42 cm shorter than the Toyota Celica, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Honda CRX is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 283 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda CRX is 1.2 metres less than that of the Toyota Celica, which means Honda CRX can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`610 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CRX has
|
Toyota Celica has
| |