Honda Accord 2008 vs Subaru Outback 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Honda Accord) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Subaru Outback) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 173 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 227 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
|
Honda Accord is more dynamic to drive. Honda Accord engine produces 23 HP less power than Subaru Outback, but torque is 123 NM more than Subaru Outback. Despite less power, Honda Accord reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 8.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.2 l/100km | 9.7 l/100km | |
|
The Honda Accord is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda Accord consumes 2.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Subaru Outback, which means that by driving the Honda Accord over 15,000 km in a year you can save 435 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda Accord consumes 3.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Subaru Outback. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1120 km in combined cycle | 730 km in combined cycle | |
| 1320 km on highway | 920 km on highway | ||
| 1040 km with real consumption | 650 km with real consumption | ||
| Honda Accord gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| 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) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 330'000 km | 370'000 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 Subaru Outback engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Honda CR-V, Honda Civic | 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.75 m | 4.73 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.55 m | |
|
Honda Accord is larger, but lower. Honda Accord is 2 cm longer than the Subaru Outback, 7 cm wider, while the height of Honda Accord is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 395 litres | 459 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1252 litres | 1649 litres | |
|
Subaru Outback has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, This could mean that the Honda Accord uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Subaru Outback (by 397 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda Accord is 1 metres more than that of the Subaru Outback, which means Honda Accord can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`100 kg | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 3400 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda Accord has
|
Subaru Outback has
| |