Nissan X-Trail 2001 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: | 2.0 - 2.5 (petrol, diesel) | 2.0 - 2.4 (petrol) | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 114 - 165 HP | 150 - 162 HP | |
| Torque: | 192 - 270 NM | 190 - 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 - 13.7 seconds | 10 - 12 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 - 10.0 | 9.1 - 10.1 | |
|
Nissan X-Trail petrol engines consumes on average 0.3 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: | 4.51 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.71 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Nissan X-Trail is 6 cm shorter than the Honda CR-V, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan X-Trail is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 410 litres | 527 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1841 litres | 952 litres | |
| Nissan X-Trail has 117 litres less trunk space than the Honda CR-V. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 889 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan X-Trail is 0.6 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`910 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan X-Trail has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |