Honda CR-V 2004 vs Suzuki Grand Vitara 2005
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 183 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 13.6 seconds | |
|
Honda CR-V is more dynamic to drive. Honda CR-V engine produces 10 HP more power than Suzuki Grand Vitara, whereas torque is 7 NM more than Suzuki Grand Vitara. Thanks to more power Honda CR-V reaches 100 km/h speed 1.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.3 | 9.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.6 l/100km | 12.1 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda CR-V consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Grand Vitara, which means that by driving the Honda CR-V over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda CR-V consumes 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Grand Vitara. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 66 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 760 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| 540 km with real consumption | 540 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: | 10 years | 28 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda Accord, Honda FR-V, Honda Stream | 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. | |||
| 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: | 4.64 m | 4.47 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.70 m | |
| Honda CR-V is 17 cm longer than the Suzuki Grand Vitara, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Honda CR-V is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 525 litres | 398 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
952 litres | 1951 litres | |
| Honda CR-V has 127 litres more trunk space than the Suzuki Grand Vitara. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Suzuki Grand Vitara (by 999 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda CR-V is 0.6 metres less than that of the Suzuki Grand Vitara, which means Honda CR-V can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`910 kg | 2`070 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`485 kg | 1`580 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 425 kg | 490 kg | |
| Honda CR-V load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 15 procentiem less than Suzuki Grand Vitara. Therefore, Suzuki Grand Vitara is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | high | |
| 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 (€): | 2600 | 3400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
Suzuki Grand Vitara has
| |