Honda CR-V 2004 vs BMW X3 2004
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 192 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 245 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
BMW X3 is a more dynamic driving. Honda CR-V engine produces 42 HP less power than BMW X3, whereas torque is 55 NM less than BMW X3. Due to the lower power, Honda CR-V reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.3 | 12.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.0 l/100km | 14.0 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda CR-V consumes 2.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3, which means that by driving the Honda CR-V over 15,000 km in a year you can save 405 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda CR-V consumes 3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 67 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 550 km in combined cycle | |
| 520 km with real consumption | 470 km with real consumption | ||
| Honda CR-V gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord, Honda FR-V, Honda Stream | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW Z4 | |
| 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 BMW X3 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. | |||
| Honda CR-V 2004 2.0 engine: In 2001, Honda introduced the K-series engine lineup, featuring an aluminum block with an open-deck design and cast-iron cylinder liners. It utilizes a port fuel injection system, a 16-valve aluminum cylinder head without hydraulic lifters, individual ignition coils, a VTC cam ... More about Honda CR-V 2004 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.58 m | 4.56 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.67 m | |
| Honda CR-V is 2 cm longer than the BMW X3, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Honda CR-V is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 527 litres | 480 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
952 litres | 1560 litres | |
| Honda CR-V has 47 litres more trunk space than the BMW X3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in BMW X3 (by 608 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda CR-V is 1.6 metres less than that of the BMW X3, which means Honda CR-V can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`270 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Honda CR-V has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW X3 has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Honda CR-V, so Honda CR-V quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 4600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
BMW X3 has
| |