Mercedes ML 1998 vs Honda CR-V 2002
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 2.3 - 5.4 (petrol, diesel) | 2.0 - 2.4 (petrol) | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 - 347 HP | 150 - 162 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 - 510 NM | 190 - 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.9 - 12.3 seconds | 10 - 12 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 - 14.4 | 9.1 - 10.1 | |
|
Mercedes ML petrol engines consumes on average 4.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than Honda CR-V. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.60 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.83 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.71 m | |
|
Mercedes ML is larger. Mercedes ML is 3 cm longer than the Honda CR-V, 5 cm wider, while the height of Mercedes ML is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 527 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 952 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mercedes ML is 1.5 metres more than that of the Honda CR-V, which means Mercedes ML can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 3`008 | ~ 1`910 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 2200 | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes ML has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |