Honda Prelude 1996 vs Toyota Celica 1990
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 133 HP | 156 HP | |
| Torque: | 179 NM | 186 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.8 seconds | 8.4 seconds | |
|
Toyota Celica is a more dynamic driving. Honda Prelude engine produces 23 HP less power than Toyota Celica, whereas torque is 7 NM less than Toyota Celica. Due to the lower power, Honda Prelude reaches 100 km/h speed 2.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.9 | 7.8 | |
|
The Toyota Celica is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Honda Prelude consumes 2.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Honda Prelude could require 315 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 600 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 800 km on highway | 1030 km on highway | ||
| Toyota Celica gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 21 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Toyota Carina E | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota Celica might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.54 m | 4.42 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.32 m | 1.30 m | |
|
Honda Prelude is larger. Honda Prelude is 12 cm longer than the Toyota Celica, 5 cm wider, while the height of Honda Prelude is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 320 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`200 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 7800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda Prelude has
|
Toyota Celica has
| |