Subaru Impreza 1998 vs Honda CR-V 2010
| Body: | Sedan | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| 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: | 218 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 290 NM | 192 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.3 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Subaru Impreza is more dynamic to drive. Subaru Impreza engine produces 68 HP more power than Honda CR-V, whereas torque is 98 NM more than Honda CR-V. Thanks to more power Subaru Impreza reaches 100 km/h speed 3.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.1 | 8.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.1 l/100km | 9.3 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Subaru Impreza consumes 2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Subaru Impreza could require 300 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Subaru Impreza consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 490 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 450 km with real consumption | 620 km with real consumption | ||
| Honda CR-V 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: | 290'000 km | 420'000 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: | 9 years | 19 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | 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. Honda CR-V might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Honda CR-V 2010 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 2010 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.35 m | 4.53 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.68 m | |
|
Subaru Impreza is smaller. Subaru Impreza is 18 cm shorter than the Honda CR-V, 13 cm narrower, while the height of Subaru Impreza is 28 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 363 litres | 524 litres | |
|
Honda CR-V has more luggage space. Subaru Impreza has 161 litres less trunk space than the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Subaru Impreza is 1 metres less than that of the Honda CR-V, which means Subaru Impreza can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`000 | 2`050 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 4200 | 8000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Subaru Impreza has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |