Honda CR-V 2010 vs Nissan X-Trail 2010
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Honda CR-V is available only with four wheel (4x4) drive, while Nissan X-Trail can be equipped with front wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive. All-wheel drive models tend to consume more fuel, so if you don't need off road capabilities, Nissan X-Trail also offers 2-wheel drive versions for fuel economy. 2WD versions also have lower maintenance costs. | |||
| Engines: | 2.0 - 2.4 | 2.0 - 2.5 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 - 166 HP | 150 - 173 HP | |
| Torque: | 192 - 350 NM | 233 - 360 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 - 12.2 seconds | 9.8 - 12.5 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.5 - 9.5 | 6.4 - 9.6 | |
|
Honda CR-V petrol engines consumes on average 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than Nissan X-Trail. On average, Honda CR-V equipped with diesel engines consume 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 170 - 185 mm (6.7 - 7.3 inches) | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Nissan X-Trail can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.55 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.70 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Honda CR-V is 9 cm shorter than the Nissan X-Trail, 3 cm wider, while the height of Honda CR-V is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 524 litres | 603 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1532 litres | 1773 litres | |
|
Nissan X-Trail has more luggage space. Honda CR-V has 79 litres less trunk space than the Nissan X-Trail. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 241 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda CR-V is 0.2 metres more than that of the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Gross weight: | ~ 2`113 kg | ~ 2`146 kg | |
| Net weight: | ~ 1`684 kg | ~ 1`622 kg | |
| Load capacity: | ~ 429 kg | ~ 524 kg | |
| Honda CR-V load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 22 procentiem less than Nissan X-Trail. Therefore, Nissan X-Trail is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 6600 | 6600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |