Land Rover Range Rover Evoque SUV 5d 2.0 Si4 240HP automatic 4x4 vs Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting 2.2 i-CDTi 140HP manual 4x4

Land Rover Range Rover Evoque SUV 5d 2.0 Si4 240HP automatic 4x4

Source: wikipedia.org Kirakiraouji Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported

16 reasons for

Land Rover Range Rover Evoque SUV 5d, model available from 2011.
It has 2.0 Si4 240HP ic petrol engine produced from 2011.
Drive 4x4 has automatic, 6 speed gearbox.

9 reasons for

Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting, model available from 2006.
It has 2.2 i-CDTi 140HP diesel engine produced from 2010 to 2012.
Drive 4x4 has manual, 5 speed gearbox.

Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting 2.2 i-CDTi 140HP manual 4x4
Land Rover

16 reasons for Land Rover Range Rover Evoque SUV 5d 2.0 Si4 240KM automat 4x4 in comparison to Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting 2.2 i-CDTi 140HP manual 4x4

Reasons for
135

Maximal power

240 > 140 hp
The horsepower is a this thing that most of us look at first when buying a car. In this comparison it is the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque SUV 5d which has by 71 percent more horsepower in relation to the Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting 2.2 i-CDTi 140HP manual 4x4. Therefore the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque SUV 5d 2.0 Si4 240HP automatic 4x4 will achieve higher maximum speed. With more horsepower the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque SUV 5d 2.0 Si4 240HP automatic 4x4 will as well provide more flexiblility in specific speeds.
50

Acceleration 0-100 km/h

7.6 > 10.3 s
The Land Rover Range Rover Evoque accelerates to 100k\h 26 percent better than the Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting 2.2 i-CDTi 140HP manual 4x4. A significant difference in acceleration in favor of the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque SUV 5d 2.0 Si4 240HP automatic 4x4 will allow him to overtake much quicker and avoid other obstacles.
38

Trunk capacity

575 > 558 l
The trunk of the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is only 3 percent bigger than the Honda CR-V III. However, the difference is not significant and it would be fair to say that both cars have more of less the same boot capacity.
33

Top speed

217 > 187 km/h
The top speed of the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is greater in comparison to this of the Honda CR-V III which allows to travel the same distance on the highway in shorter period of time. The difference that amounts to 30 kilometers/hour is small and is not realy noticable in daily driving.
30

Maximal torque RPM

1,750 > 2,000 revolutions/minute
A wider range as well as a lower number of revolutions at which the maximum torque is delivered determines an engine’s performance. However, to have a full perspective on a car’s engine performance, it is worth to see a torque performance graph.
15

Wheelbase

2,667 > 2,615 mm
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has 2 % longer wheelbase than the Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting 2.2 i-CDTi 140HP manual 4x4. A longer wheelbase provides more stable and comfortable ride, especially when driving fast. It also provides more storage space. But, vehicles having a longer wheelbase will not be as maneuverable as those with a shorter length between its axles.
10

Number of gears

6 > 5 gears
The Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has a one extra gear compared to the Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting. Generally this extra speed is a taller one so that the previous gears can be narrower to allow better performance in the lower gears. One more gear as well will result in smaller fuel consumption and CO2 emission.
9

Ground clearance

217 > 175 mm
Ground clearance is defined as the minimum distance between the vehicle body and the road. From these two cars, it is the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque SUV 5d 2.0 Si4 240HP automatic 4x4 that has 42 millimeters higher ground clearance than the Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting. For this reason the Land Rover will cope better with rough terrain and obstacles in the city. One drawback is the higher ride height means a higher center of gravity, which can adversely influence the handling of the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque SUV 5d.
8

Maximum load capacity

710 > 473 kg
3

Price range

luxury > popular
1

Model release date

2011 > 2006
The difference in date of commencement of production between presented cars is only 5 years, however, new technologies for vehicles are appearing at a staggering pace what may cause that the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque SUV 5d may feature more advanced technologies.
0

Transmission

automatic > manual
Automatic transmission which is in the Land Rover despite having a few disadvantages offers much more better comfort of driving. After a long ride especially in the city the driver is more relaxed. Moreover automatic puts less strain on the engine thanks to the factory settings of changing gears in specific revs range.
0

Payload

2,348 > 2,042 kg
0

Front track

1,625 > 1,565 mm
0

Width with outside mirrors

2,125 > 2,096 mm
0

Curb weight

1,636 > 1,566 kg

Honda

9 reasons for Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting 2.2 i-CDTi 140KM manual 4x4 in comparison to Land Rover Range Rover Evoque SUV 5d 2.0 Si4 240HP automatic 4x4

Reasons for
112

Average consumption

6.9 > 8.5 l
The Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting 2.2 i-CDTi 140HP manual 4x4 uses 19 % less in the mixed cycle in relation to the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque SUV 5d 2.0 Si4 240HP automatic 4x4. The difference in the amount of 19 % is not very appreciable. Nevertheless in the long run it can generate a considerable reduction of costs.
59

Maximal torque

340 > 338 Nm
Maximum torque of the Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting 2.2 i-CDTi 140HP manual 4x4 is 2 newton meters greater than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. For this reason, the Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting 2.2 i-CDTi 140HP manual 4x4 will accelerate a little bit swifter and be better for overtaking other vehicles. Appropriate use of the flexibility of the engine may also make that the Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting will use on average less fuel for every 100 km.
56

Urban consumption

8.1 > 11.7 l
The Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting burns up 3.6 l fewer oil in city traffic in comparison to the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque SUV 5d 2.0 Si4 240HP automatic 4x4. The difference in the amount of 3.6 l is quite significant in everyday use of the car. Moreover, in a long run it will even bring you significant savings. Keep in mind that fuel consumption may change depending on how you drive
33

Trunk capacity with seats down

1,530 > 1,447 l
24

Extra-urban consumption

5.8 > 6.9 l
8

Engine capacity

2,205 > 1,998 cc
The Honda CR-V III has 207 cubic centimeters larger engine size in comparison to the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. Because the difference is not big, the Honda should accelerate slightly dynamically, assuming that other paramerters are the same.
6

Length

4,574 > 4,365 mm
The Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting 2.2 i-CDTi 140HP manual 4x4 is 209 millimeters longer in relation to the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque SUV 5d 2.0 Si4 240HP automatic 4x4. The length of the vehicle is significant when it comes to driving comfort and space in the trunk. The Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting probably will be offering to it's users more space for legs. At the same time the Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting will be better driven ,however, the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque SUV 5d will be a slightly easier for parking due to shorter length .
1

Height

1,677 > 1,635 mm
The higher a vehicle is, the the more convenient is a boarding it and greater capacity of putting massive amount of luggage to it. The difference between these two cars at the level of 42 millimeters in favor of the Honda CR-V III is little and does not matter much.
0

Maximal power RPM

4,000 > 5,500 revolutions/minute

Cars specifications

Land Rover Range Rover Evoque SUV 5d 2.0 Si4 240HP automatic 4x4 Honda CR-V III SUV Facelifting 2.2 i-CDTi 140HP manual 4x4
    Gross trailer weight 1,796 kg -
    Price range luxury popular
    Model release date 2011 2006
    Facelifting no yes
    Class compact SUV compact SUV
By using this site, you agree to the storage and use of cookie files. OK