Toyota Sienna 2010 vs Honda CR-V 2013
| Body: | Minivan / MPV | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.7 Petrol | 2.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 187 HP | 190 HP | |
| Torque: | 252 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 10.7 seconds | |
| Toyota Sienna engine produces 3 HP less power than Honda CR-V, but torque is 32 NM more than Honda CR-V. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.2 | 8.4 | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Toyota Sienna consumes 2.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Toyota Sienna could require 420 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 660 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 760 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Honda CR-V 2012: Vehicle has automatic four-wheel drive system that sends torque to front wheels under normal conditions. Electronically controlled multi-plate clutch transfers torque to rear axle when wheel slip is detected. The all-wheel drive system constantly interacts with the VSA dynamic stabilization system and electric power steering to provide full vehicle control, good traction and maneuverability in all road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 18 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Lexus RX, Toyota Highlander | 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 Sienna might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Toyota Sienna engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.09 m | 4.55 m | |
| Width: | 1.99 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.75 m | 1.69 m | |
|
Toyota Sienna is larger. Toyota Sienna is 54 cm longer than the Honda CR-V, 17 cm wider, while the height of Toyota Sienna is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 993 litres | 589 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
3810 litres | 1669 litres | |
|
Toyota Sienna has more luggage capacity. Toyota Sienna has 404 litres more trunk space than the Honda CR-V. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Toyota Sienna (by 2141 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota Sienna is 0.4 metres less than that of the Honda CR-V, which means Toyota Sienna can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 17 600 | 10 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Sienna has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |