Mercedes ML 2001 vs Honda CR-V 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.2 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 310 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9 seconds | 10 seconds | |
|
Mercedes ML is more dynamic to drive. Mercedes ML engine produces 68 HP more power than Honda CR-V, whereas torque is 120 NM more than Honda CR-V. Thanks to more power Mercedes ML reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 13.5 | 9.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 13.6 l/100km | 9.5 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mercedes ML consumes 4.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mercedes ML could require 660 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mercedes ML consumes 4.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 83 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 610 km in combined cycle | 630 km in combined cycle | |
| 610 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 420'000 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 Mercedes ML engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Mercedes C klase, Mercedes E klase, Chrysler Crossfire | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord, Honda FR-V, Honda Stream | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mercedes ML might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mercedes ML 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. | |||
| Honda CR-V 2002 2.0 engine: In 2001, Honda introduced the K-series engine lineup, featuring an aluminum block with an open-deck design and cast-iron cylinder liners. It utilizes a port fuel injection system, a 16-valve aluminum cylinder head without hydraulic lifters, individual ignition coils, a VTC cam ... More about Honda CR-V 2002 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.64 m | 4.58 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.71 m | |
|
Mercedes ML is larger. Mercedes ML is 6 cm longer than the Honda CR-V, 6 cm wider, while the height of Mercedes ML is 11 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 525 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`365 | 1`910 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | high | |
| Honda CR-V has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mercedes ML has serious deffects in 115 percent more cases than Honda CR-V, so Honda CR-V quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2600 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes ML has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |