Nissan X-Trail 2006 vs Honda CR-V 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 314 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.2 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
Honda CR-V is a more dynamic driving. Nissan X-Trail engine produces 4 HP less power than Honda CR-V, whereas torque is 26 NM less than Honda CR-V. Due to the lower power, Nissan X-Trail reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 6.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.5 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan X-Trail consumes 0.4 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 60 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan X-Trail consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 860 km in combined cycle | |
| 700 km with real consumption | 770 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: | 440'000 km | 350'000 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 Nissan X-Trail engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Nissan Almera, Nissan Primera, Nissan Almera Tino | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord, Honda FR-V | |
| 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 2004 2.2 engine: Honda’s first diesel engine featured an aluminum block, a variable-geometry turbocharger, second-generation Bosch Common Rail injection, 16-valve cylinder head, and a balance shaft integrated into the crankcase. The ... More about Honda CR-V 2004 2.2 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 | 525 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 952 litres | |
|
Honda CR-V has more luggage space. Nissan X-Trail has 115 litres less trunk space than the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | no data | |
| 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: |
Nissan X-Trail has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |