Nissan X-Trail 2010 vs Honda CR-V 2010
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Nissan X-Trail is available with front 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 X-Trail also offers 2-wheel drive versions for fuel economy. 2WD versions also have lower maintenance costs. | |||
| Engines: | 2.0 - 2.5 | 2.0 - 2.4 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 - 173 HP | 150 - 166 HP | |
| Torque: | 233 - 360 NM | 192 - 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 - 12.5 seconds | 9.6 - 12.2 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 - 9.6 | 6.5 - 9.5 | |
|
Nissan X-Trail petrol engines consumes on average 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than Honda CR-V. On average, Nissan X-Trail equipped with diesel engines consume 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the 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. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | 170 - 185 mm (6.7 - 7.3 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Nissan X-Trail can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.63 m | 4.55 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.70 m | 1.68 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Nissan X-Trail is 9 cm longer than the Honda CR-V, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan X-Trail is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 603 litres | 524 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1773 litres | 1532 litres | |
|
Nissan X-Trail has more luggage capacity. Nissan X-Trail has 79 litres more trunk space than the Honda CR-V. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 241 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan X-Trail is 0.2 metres less than that of the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Gross weight: | ~ 2`146 kg | ~ 2`113 kg | |
| Net weight: | ~ 1`622 kg | ~ 1`684 kg | |
| Load capacity: | ~ 524 kg | ~ 429 kg | |
| Nissan X-Trail load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 18 procentiem more than Honda CR-V. Therefore, Nissan X-Trail is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 6600 | 6600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan X-Trail has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |