Nissan X-Trail 2001 vs Honda CR-V 1997
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
---|---|---|---|
Engines: | 2.0 - 2.5 (petrol, diesel) | 2.0 (petrol) | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 114 - 165 HP | 128 - 147 HP | |
Torque: | 192 - 270 NM | 182 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 - 13.7 seconds | 10.5 - 12.5 seconds | |
Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 - 10.0 | 9.7 - 10.2 | |
Nissan X-Trail petrol engines consumes on average 0.3 litres less 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: | 4.51 m | 4.53 m | |
Width: | 1.76 m | 1.75 m | |
Height: | 1.68 m | 1.68 m | |
Both cars are similar in size. Nissan X-Trail is 2 cm shorter than the Honda CR-V, 1 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 410 litres | 375 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1841 litres | 670 litres | |
Nissan X-Trail has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Nissan X-Trail has 35 litres more trunk space than the Honda CR-V. The Honda CR-V may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 1171 litres). | |||
Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.6 meters | |
The turning circle of the Nissan X-Trail is 0.4 metres more than that of the Honda CR-V, which means Nissan X-Trail can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`010 | ~ 1`900 | |
Safety: | no data | no data | |
Quality: | above average | high | |
Average price (€): | 2200 | 1400 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Nissan X-Trail has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |