Honda CR-V 2001 vs Suzuki Grand Vitara 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 147 HP | 128 HP | |
| Torque: | 182 NM | 174 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Honda CR-V engine produces 19 HP more power than Suzuki Grand Vitara, whereas torque is 8 NM more than Suzuki Grand Vitara. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.7 | 9.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.6 l/100km | 10.2 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Honda CR-V consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Grand Vitara, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Honda CR-V could require 60 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Honda CR-V consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Grand Vitara. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 66 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 590 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 600 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| Suzuki Grand Vitara 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) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 27 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Honda Accord | Used also on Suzuki SX4 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Suzuki Grand Vitara might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.53 m | 4.20 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.74 m | |
| Honda CR-V is 33 cm longer than the Suzuki Grand Vitara, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Honda CR-V is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 374 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
670 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`850 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Suzuki Grand Vitara has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Honda CR-V, so Suzuki Grand Vitara quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
Suzuki Grand Vitara has
| |