Volkswagen Sharan 2000 vs Honda Stream 2001
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 156 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 192 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 9.4 seconds | |
|
Honda Stream is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen Sharan engine produces 6 HP less power than Honda Stream, but torque is 18 NM more than Honda Stream. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Sharan reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 | 8.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.1 l/100km | 9.1 l/100km | |
|
The Honda Stream is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Sharan consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda Stream, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Sharan could require 120 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Sharan consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda Stream. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 630 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 780 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 600 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Sharan gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Audi A4, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3 | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda CR-V, Honda Accord, Honda FR-V | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Sharan might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Volkswagen Sharan 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. | |||
| Volkswagen Sharan 2000 1.8 engine: The weakest link in this engine is the turbine, whose failure is contributed to by a faulty catalytic converter. The oil pump and chain tensioner also tend to have problems. Honda Stream 2001 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 Stream 2001 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.63 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.73 m | 1.59 m | |
|
Volkswagen Sharan is larger. Volkswagen Sharan is 6 cm longer than the Honda Stream, 11 cm wider, while the height of Volkswagen Sharan is 14 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 158 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 158 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1520 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Sharan is 0.1 metres less than that of the Honda Stream. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`900 | 2`030 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2200 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Sharan has
|
Honda Stream has
| |