Honda CR-V 2017 vs Skoda Karoq 2017
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
| 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: | 190 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 243 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 8.6 seconds | |
| Honda CR-V engine produces 40 HP more power than Skoda Karoq, but torque is 7 NM less than Skoda Karoq. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.1 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.2 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Karoq is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda CR-V consumes 2.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Karoq, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Honda CR-V could require 390 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda CR-V consumes 2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Karoq. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 53 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 740 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 570 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
| Skoda Karoq 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: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
|
Honda CR-V has 4x4: Vehicle features automatic four-wheel drive system that sends torque to front wheels under typical conditions. Electronically controlled multi-plate clutch transfers torque to rear wheels when slipping is detected. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 208 mm (8.2 inches) | 176 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 330'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Skoda Octavia, Audi A3, Skoda Superb, Skoda Scala, Audi A1, Audi Q3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Skoda Karoq 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. | |||
| Skoda Karoq 2017 1.5 engine: The engine is praised for being both flexible and torquey, delivering impressive performance for its horsepower rating. It is also remarkably fuel-efficient. However, the engine is very demanding when it comes ... More about Skoda Karoq 2017 1.5 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.59 m | 4.38 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.61 m | |
|
Honda CR-V is larger. Honda CR-V is 21 cm longer than the Skoda Karoq, 1 cm wider, while the height of Honda CR-V is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 497 litres | 521 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1110 litres | 1630 litres | |
|
Skoda Karoq has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Honda CR-V has 24 litres less trunk space than the Skoda Karoq. This could mean that the Honda CR-V 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 Skoda Karoq (by 520 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda CR-V is 0.5 metres more than that of the Skoda Karoq, which means Honda CR-V can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`929 | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Honda CR-V scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 18 800 | 18 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
Skoda Karoq has
| |