Suzuki SX4 2013 vs Honda CR-V 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 117 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 156 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
Honda CR-V is a more dynamic driving. Suzuki SX4 engine produces 33 HP less power than Honda CR-V, whereas torque is 34 NM less than Honda CR-V. Due to the lower power, Suzuki SX4 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 7.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 9.2 l/100km | |
|
The Suzuki SX4 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Suzuki SX4 consumes 2.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V, which means that by driving the Suzuki SX4 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 375 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Suzuki SX4 consumes 1.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 870 km in combined cycle | 730 km in combined cycle | |
| 970 km on highway | 920 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 24 years | 19 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Suzuki Grand Vitara, Suzuki Swift, Suzuki Liana, Suzuki Vitara | Used also on Honda Accord | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Suzuki SX4 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Suzuki SX4 2013 1.6 engine: A simple and robust engine, not particularly demanding in terms of fuel quality.
High engine timing chain lifetime.
Tends to increase oil consumption, head gasket failures may occur. Honda CR-V 2012 2.0 engine: This engine is sensitive to both fuel and oil quality. Using low-grade gasoline can quickly damage the catalytic converter and lead to premature failure of the oxygen sensors. Many Honda owners are annoyed ... More about Honda CR-V 2012 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.30 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.59 m | 1.69 m | |
|
Suzuki SX4 is smaller. Suzuki SX4 is 27 cm shorter than the Honda CR-V, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Suzuki SX4 is 10 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 589 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1269 litres | 1669 litres | |
|
Honda CR-V has more luggage space. Suzuki SX4 has 159 litres less trunk space than the Honda CR-V. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Honda CR-V (by 400 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki SX4 is 1.4 metres less than that of the Honda CR-V, which means Suzuki SX4 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`740 | 2`100 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Suzuki SX4 is better rated in child safety tests. The Suzuki SX4 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Suzuki SX4 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Honda CR-V has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Suzuki SX4, so Suzuki SX4 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8200 | 11 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki SX4 has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |