Honda CR-V 2017 vs Mazda CX-30 2019
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 190 HP | 180 HP | |
| Torque: | 243 NM | 224 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
| Honda CR-V engine produces 10 HP more power than Mazda CX-30, whereas torque is 19 NM more than Mazda CX-30. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 5.6 | |
|
The Mazda CX-30 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Honda CR-V consumes 2.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-30, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Honda CR-V could require 330 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 53 litres | 48 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 760 km on highway | 940 km on highway | ||
| Mazda CX-30 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 198 mm (7.8 inches) | 175 mm (6.9 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Honda CR-V 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. Note, however, that this Honda CR-V version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. Choose from nine 4x4 versions of Honda CR-V 2017 if off-road driveability is important to you. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord | Used also on Mazda 3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Honda CR-V might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mazda CX-30 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: | 4.59 m | 4.40 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.56 m | |
|
Honda CR-V is larger. Honda CR-V is 19 cm longer than the Mazda CX-30, 6 cm wider, while the height of Honda CR-V is 12 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 497 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1110 litres | 1406 litres | |
| Honda CR-V has 67 litres more trunk space than the Mazda CX-30. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda CX-30 (by 296 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`070 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 19 200 | 23 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
Mazda CX-30 has
| |