Toyota Celica 1995 vs Honda Prelude 1996
| Body: | Cabrio | Coupe | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 175 HP | 133 HP | |
| Torque: | 186 NM | 179 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.6 seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
|
Toyota Celica is more dynamic to drive. Toyota Celica engine produces 42 HP more power than Honda Prelude, whereas torque is 7 NM more than Honda Prelude. Thanks to more power Toyota Celica reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.9 | 9.2 | |
|
The Honda Prelude is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Toyota Celica consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda Prelude, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Toyota Celica could require 105 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 600 km in combined cycle | 650 km in combined cycle | |
| Honda Prelude gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 21 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Toyota Carina E | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota Celica might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.50 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.33 m | 1.32 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Toyota Celica is 4 cm shorter than the Honda Prelude, width is practically the same , while the height of Toyota Celica is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`200 | 1`200 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Celica has
|
Honda Prelude has
| |