Nissan Serena 1992 vs Honda CR-V 2002
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Body: | Minivan / MPV | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Nissan Serena is available with rear wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive, while Honda CR-V can be equipped only with four wheel (4x4) drive. All-wheel drive models tend to consume more fuel, so if you don't need off road capabilities, Nissan Serena also offers 2-wheel drive versions for fuel economy. 2WD versions also have lower maintenance costs. | |||
| Engines: | 1.6 - 2.3 (petrol, diesel) | 2.0 - 2.4 (petrol) | |
| Both cars are available with petrol engines. Nissan Serena is available also with diesel engines. Diesel engines typically offer better fuel efficiency and higher torque compared to other engine types. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 67 - 140 HP | 150 - 162 HP | |
| Torque: | 127 - 186 NM | 190 - 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.2 - 31 seconds | 10 - 12 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.3 - 11.1 | 9.1 - 10.1 | |
|
Nissan Serena petrol engines consumes on average 1.3 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! | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.32 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.84 m | 1.71 m | |
|
Nissan Serena is smaller, but higher. Nissan Serena is 25 cm shorter than the Honda CR-V, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Serena is 13 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 350 litres | 527 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
620 litres | 952 litres | |
|
Honda CR-V has more luggage space. Nissan Serena has 177 litres less trunk space than the Honda CR-V. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Honda CR-V (by 332 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Serena is 1 metres more than that of the Honda CR-V, which means Nissan Serena can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`150 | ~ 1`910 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Serena has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |