Subaru Forester 1997 vs Honda CR-V 1999
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 147 HP | |
| Torque: | 184 NM | 182 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.4 seconds | 12.5 seconds | |
| Subaru Forester engine produces 22 HP less power than Honda CR-V, but torque is 2 NM more than Honda CR-V. Despite less power, Subaru Forester reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.2 | 10.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.4 l/100km | 10.3 l/100km | |
|
By specification Subaru Forester consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V, which means that by driving the Subaru Forester over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Subaru Forester consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 580 km in combined cycle | |
| 800 km on highway | 690 km on highway | ||
| 570 km with real consumption | 560 km with real consumption | ||
| Subaru Forester 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: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 460'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Honda CR-V engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Subaru Impreza, Subaru Legacy | Used also on Honda Accord | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Subaru Forester might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.45 m | 4.53 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.60 m | 1.68 m | |
|
Subaru Forester is smaller. Subaru Forester is 8 cm shorter than the Honda CR-V, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Subaru Forester is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 406 litres | 375 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1525 litres | 670 litres | |
|
Subaru Forester has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, The Honda CR-V may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Subaru Forester (by 855 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Subaru Forester is 0.2 metres more than that of the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`875 kg | 1`900 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`440 kg | 1`490 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 435 kg | 410 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | Honda CR-V has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Subaru Forester has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Honda CR-V, so Honda CR-V quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 1400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Subaru Forester has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |