Honda CR-V 2012 vs Mitsubishi Outlander 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 147 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 195 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.8 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Outlander is a more dynamic driving. Honda CR-V engine produces 3 HP more power than Mitsubishi Outlander, but torque is 5 NM less than Mitsubishi Outlander. Despite the higher power, Honda CR-V reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 7.8 | |
| Honda CR-V consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means that by driving the Honda CR-V over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 920 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 19 years | 19 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Honda Accord | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi ASX, Peugeot 4008 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Outlander might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Honda CR-V 2012 2.0 engine: This engine is sensitive to both fuel and oil quality. Using low-grade gasoline can quickly damage the catalytic converter and lead to premature failure of the oxygen sensors.
Many Honda owners are annoyed ... More about Honda CR-V 2012 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.57 m | 4.66 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.69 m | 1.68 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Honda CR-V is 8 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Outlander, 2 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 589 litres | 591 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1669 litres | 986 litres | |
| Honda CR-V has 2 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Outlander. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Honda CR-V (by 683 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda CR-V is 1.2 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means Honda CR-V can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`100 | 1`985 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mitsubishi Outlander scores higher in safety tests. The Mitsubishi Outlander scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Honda CR-V has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Outlander has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Honda CR-V, so Honda CR-V quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 600 | 9200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has
| |