2017 Honda CR-V vs. Nissan X-Trail: Compact SUV Showdown

What To Know

  • The front-wheel-drive CR-V achieves an EPA-estimated 26 mpg in the city and 32 mpg on the highway, while the all-wheel-drive model returns 25 mpg in the city and 31 mpg on the highway.
  • The Nissan X-Trail, meanwhile, manages 22 mpg in the city and 27 mpg on the highway with front-wheel drive and 21 mpg in the city and 26 mpg on the highway with all-wheel drive.
  • If you plan on towing a trailer or boat, the Honda CR-V has a maximum towing capacity of 1,500 pounds, while the Nissan X-Trail can tow up to 2,000 pounds.

In the fiercely competitive compact SUV segment, two titans stand out – the Honda CR-V and the Nissan X-Trail. Both vehicles have earned a reputation for delivering a blend of practicality, versatility, and performance. But which one emerges as the superior choice? This comprehensive comparison will delve into the key aspects of the Honda CR-V and Nissan X-Trail 2017 models to determine which SUV reigns supreme.

Performance and Efficiency: A Close Match

Under the hood, the Honda CR-V offers a standard 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine that generates 184 horsepower and 180 lb-ft of torque. The Nissan X-Trail, on the other hand, comes equipped with a 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine that produces 170 horsepower and 175 lb-ft of torque. While the CR-V boasts slightly more power, the X-Trail’s lower curb weight results in comparable acceleration and handling.

In terms of fuel efficiency, the Honda CR-V holds a slight edge. The front-wheel-drive CR-V achieves an EPA-estimated 26 mpg in the city and 32 mpg on the highway, while the all-wheel-drive model returns 25 mpg in the city and 31 mpg on the highway. The Nissan X-Trail, meanwhile, manages 22 mpg in the city and 27 mpg on the highway with front-wheel drive and 21 mpg in the city and 26 mpg on the highway with all-wheel drive.

Interior Space and Comfort: A Roomy Affair

Both the Honda CR-V and Nissan X-Trail offer spacious and comfortable interiors. The CR-V provides ample headroom and legroom for both front and rear passengers, along with a generous cargo area that expands to a maximum of 75.8 cubic feet with the rear seats folded down. The X-Trail matches the CR-V in terms of passenger space and cargo capacity, offering 76.9 cubic feet of cargo space with the rear seats folded.

When it comes to interior features and amenities, the Honda CR-V and Nissan X-Trail are well-equipped. Both vehicles offer a range of standard features, including a touchscreen infotainment system, Bluetooth connectivity, and a rearview camera. However, the CR-V gains an edge with its available features, such as a panoramic sunroof, heated and ventilated front seats, and a hands-free power tailgate.

Safety and Reliability: A Top Priority

The Honda CR-V and Nissan X-Trail have earned top safety ratings from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). Both SUVs come standard with a suite of advanced safety features, including airbags, anti-lock brakes, and electronic stability control.

In terms of reliability, the Honda CR-V has a slight advantage over the Nissan X-Trail. The CR-V has consistently ranked higher in J.D. Power’s Vehicle Dependability Study, which measures the number of problems experienced by owners over a three-year period.

Price and Value: A Matter of Choice

The Honda CR-V and Nissan X-Trail are competitively priced, with starting prices that are within a few hundred dollars of each other. The CR-V LX, the base trim level, starts at $24,045, while the X-Trail S, the base trim level, starts at $23,860. As you move up the trim levels, the prices increase accordingly, with the top-of-the-line CR-V Touring starting at $33,695 and the top-of-the-line X-Trail Platinum starting at $34,590.

Ultimately, the choice between the Honda CR-V and Nissan X-Trail 2017 models depends on your individual needs and preferences. If you prioritize performance and fuel efficiency, the CR-V may be the better choice. If you value interior space and comfort, the X-Trail may be a more suitable option. Both SUVs offer excellent safety features, reliability, and value for money, making them top contenders in the compact SUV segment.

Beyond the Comparison: Additional Factors to Consider

  • Towing Capacity: If you plan on towing a trailer or boat, the Honda CR-V has a maximum towing capacity of 1,500 pounds, while the Nissan X-Trail can tow up to 2,000 pounds.
  • Off-Road Capability: The Nissan X-Trail offers slightly better off-road capabilities than the Honda CR-V, thanks to its available all-wheel-drive system with hill descent control.
  • Fuel Type: The Honda CR-V can run on regular unleaded gasoline, while the Nissan X-Trail requires premium unleaded gasoline.

“The Verdict: A Close Call”

After a thorough comparison of the Honda CR-V and Nissan X-Trail 2017 models, it’s clear that both SUVs are excellent choices in the compact SUV segment. The CR-V offers slightly better performance and fuel efficiency, while the X-Trail provides more interior space and comfort. Ultimately, the decision between these two vehicles comes down to your personal preferences and priorities.

Answers to Your Questions

  • Which SUV has a better safety rating?

Both the Honda CR-V and Nissan X-Trail have earned top safety ratings from the NHTSA and IIHS.

  • Which SUV has a more powerful engine?

The Honda CR-V has a slightly more powerful engine than the Nissan X-Trail, with 184 horsepower compared to 170 horsepower.

  • Which SUV has more cargo space?

The Nissan X-Trail has slightly more cargo space than the Honda CR-V, with 76.9 cubic feet compared to 75.8 cubic feet.

  • Which SUV is more fuel-efficient?

The Honda CR-V is slightly more fuel-efficient than the Nissan X-Trail, with an EPA-estimated 26 mpg in the city and 32 mpg on the highway compared to 22 mpg in the city and 27 mpg on the highway.

  • Which SUV is more affordable?

The Honda CR-V and Nissan X-Trail are competitively priced, with starting prices that are within a few hundred dollars of each other.