Nissan X-Trail 2005 vs Honda CR-V 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 192 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.3 seconds | 10.8 seconds | |
|
Nissan X-Trail is more dynamic to drive. Nissan X-Trail engine produces 10 HP less power than Honda CR-V, but torque is 2 NM more than Honda CR-V. Despite less power, Nissan X-Trail reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.1 | 9.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.1 l/100km | 10.0 l/100km | |
|
By specification Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan X-Trail could require 15 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 640 km in combined cycle | |
| 810 km on highway | 760 km on highway | ||
| 590 km with real consumption | 580 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Honda CR-V 2004: Car features Honda`s real-time four-wheel-drive system, which sends torque to the front wheels under normal conditions. A multi-plate clutch transfers torque to the rear axle when wheel slip is detected (pressure is applied to the clutch by a dual-pump system). To allow ABS to work smoothly, the clutch is also disengaged during braking. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 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 Honda CR-V engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Nissan Primera, Nissan Serena, Nissan Sentra | 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. Honda CR-V might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Honda CR-V 2004 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 2004 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.51 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.71 m | |
|
Nissan X-Trail is smaller. Nissan X-Trail is 13 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: | 10.6 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan X-Trail is 0.2 metres more than that of the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | 1`910 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Honda CR-V has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan X-Trail has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Honda CR-V, so Honda CR-V quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2600 | 2600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.1/10 | 8.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Honda CR-V has
| |