2011 Honda CR-V EX-L

2011 Honda CR-V EX-L Competitors

$27-30k mid-size SUV, designed & built in Japan 21 city / 27-28 hwy 321-428 mile range, gas engine
180 hp 146 cu. in. 4-cylinder 4 stars stability control, ABS, child door locks

As well as being compared against other mid-size SUVs and minivan and SUVs, the 2011 Honda CR-V EX-L is also often compared to cars and luxury cars. The 2011 Honda CR-V EX-L's top rivals come from Honda (such as the Accord EX-L and the CR-V EX) and Nissan (such as the Altima 2.5 S and the Murano )

compared to mid-size SUV competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the CR-V EX-L compared to other mid-size SUV competitors include: it has slightly more cargo space (72.9 ft3 vs 27.6 ft3), is slightly more fuel efficient in the city (21 mpg vs 18 mpg), is slightly more fuel efficient on the highway (27 mpg vs 25 mpg), costs less ($28,905 vs $41,925) and has better traction (four-wheel drive vs two-wheel drive).

However, on average it is significantly less powerful (180 HP @ 6,800 RPM vs 276 HP @ 6,300 RPM), slightly less ground clearance (6.7" vs 7.9"), lacks continously-variable transmission (traditional vs continuously variable), has slightly fewer seats (5 vs 7) and is significantly more sluggish (19.7 lb/hp vs 15.0 lb/hp).

2011 BMW X3 xDrive35i

2011 BMW X3 xDrive35i
$41,925

Significant advantages of the X3 xDrive35i (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Significantly more powerful: 300 HP @ 5,800 RPM vs 180 HP @ 6,800 RPM
  • Significantly more ground clearance for rough terrain: 8" vs 6.7"
  • X3 xDrive35i's Twin turbocharger increases power output: Twin turbocharger vs None

Significant disadvantages of the X3 xDrive35i (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Much less cargo room: 27.6 ft3 vs 72.9 ft3
  • Power outlets not available
  • Power mirrors not available

common strengths of the X3 xDrive35i and CR-V EX-L

  • Both very efficient on the highway: 26 mpg vs 27 mpg
  • Both vehicles have above average braking abilities for this class of vehicle: 129 ft vs 123 ft
  • Both have power seats
arrow Compare the 2011 BMW X3 xDrive35i vs the 2011 Honda CR-V EX-L

2012 BMW X5 Premium

2012 BMW X5 Premium
$55,675

Significant advantages of the X5 Premium (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Much more ground clearance for rough terrain: 8.3" vs 6.7"
  • Significantly more powerful: 300 HP @ 5,800 RPM vs 180 HP @ 6,800 RPM
  • Significantly higher towing capacity: 1,290 lb vs 850 lb

Significant disadvantages of the X5 Premium (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Much wider turning radius: 42.0 ft vs 37.8 ft
  • Significantly worse city mileage: 16 mpg vs 21 mpg
  • Significantly more expensive: $55,675 vs $28,905

common strengths of the X5 Premium and CR-V EX-L

  • Both vehicles have above average braking abilities for this class of vehicle: 130 ft vs 123 ft
  • Both come standard with sun roofs
  • Both come standard with leather interiors
arrow Compare the 2012 BMW X5 Premium vs the 2011 Honda CR-V EX-L

2011 Nissan Murano

2011 Nissan Murano
$47,200

Significant advantages of the Murano (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • More powerful: 260 HP @ 6,000 RPM vs 180 HP @ 6,800 RPM
  • Safer in side crashes for the driver: 5 stars vs 3 stars
  • Has continuously variable transmission: Continuously variable vs Traditional

Significant disadvantages of the Murano (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Much less cargo room: 21.3 ft3 vs 72.9 ft3
  • Worse highway mileage: 23 mpg vs 27 mpg
  • Significantly longer braking distance from 60mph: 136 ft vs 123 ft

common strengths of the Murano and CR-V EX-L

  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
  • Both come standard with leather interiors
  • Both have power seats
arrow Compare the 2011 Nissan Murano vs the 2011 Honda CR-V EX-L

2011 Ford Edge SEL

2011 Ford Edge SEL
$33,325

Significant advantages of the Edge SEL (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Significantly more powerful: 285 HP @ 6,500 RPM vs 180 HP @ 6,800 RPM
  • Significantly more ground clearance for rough terrain: 7.9" vs 6.7"
  • Safer in side crashes for the driver: 5 stars vs 3 stars

Significant disadvantages of the Edge SEL (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Significantly longer braking distance from 60mph: 134 ft vs 123 ft
  • Only has four-wheel drive: all-wheel drive vs four-wheel drive
  • Less safe in head-on crashes for the driver: 3 stars vs 4 stars

common strengths of the Edge SEL and CR-V EX-L

  • Both have spacious back seats: 52.9 ft3 vs 48.0 ft3
  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
  • Both have power seats
arrow Compare the 2011 Ford Edge SEL vs the 2011 Honda CR-V EX-L

2011 Honda CR-V EX

2011 Honda CR-V EX
$25,005

Significant advantages of the CR-V EX (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the CR-V EX (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Only has four-wheel drive: two-wheel drive vs four-wheel drive
  • Leather not available
  • Power seats not available

common strengths of the CR-V EX and CR-V EX-L

  • Both very efficient on the highway: 28 mpg vs 27 mpg
  • Both very efficient in the city: 21 mpg vs 21 mpg
  • Both vehicles have above average braking abilities for this class of vehicle: 130 ft vs 123 ft
arrow Compare the CR-V EX vs the CR-V EX-L

2012 Kia Sorento EX

2012 Kia Sorento EX
$28,750

Significant advantages of the Sorento EX (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Significantly more powerful: 276 HP @ 6,300 RPM vs 180 HP @ 6,800 RPM
  • More ground clearance for rough terrain: 7.5" vs 6.7"
  • Much longer-lasting basic warranty: 5 year vs 3 year

Significant disadvantages of the Sorento EX (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Only has four-wheel drive: front-wheel drive vs four-wheel drive
  • Much more cramped back seats: 35.7 ft3 vs 48.0 ft3
  • Significantly longer braking distance from 60mph: 136 ft vs 123 ft

common strengths of the Sorento EX and CR-V EX-L

  • Both very efficient on the highway: 26 mpg vs 27 mpg
  • Both have power seats
arrow Compare the 2012 Kia Sorento EX vs the 2011 Honda CR-V EX-L

compared to minivan and SUV competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the CR-V EX-L compared to other minivan and SUV competitors include: it is slightly more fuel efficient in the city (21 mpg vs 16 mpg), is slightly more fuel efficient on the highway (27 mpg vs 22 mpg), has better traction (four-wheel drive vs front-wheel drive), safer in head-on collisions for the front passenger (3 stars vs 2 stars) and slightly shorter braking distance from 60mph (123 ft vs 134 ft).

However, on average it has slightly less cargo space (72.9 ft3 vs 126.5 ft3), has 2 rows of seats (2 vs 3), less safe in head-on collisions for the driver (4 stars vs 5 stars), lacks continously-variable transmission (traditional vs continuously variable) and has significantly fewer seats (5 vs 7).

2011 Nissan Quest LE

2011 Nissan Quest LE
$42,150

Significant advantages of the Quest LE (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Number of rows of seating: 3 vs 2
  • More cargo room: 126.5 ft3 vs 72.9 ft3
  • Has continuously variable transmission: Continuously variable vs Traditional

Significant disadvantages of the Quest LE (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Front air conditioning not available
  • Only has four-wheel drive: front-wheel drive vs four-wheel drive
  • Moon roof not available

common strengths of the Quest LE and CR-V EX-L

  • Both come standard with leather interiors
  • Both have power seats
  • The {better} has a subwoofer to accurately produce deep bass frequencies in music
arrow Compare the 2011 Nissan Quest LE vs the 2011 Honda CR-V EX-L

2011 Mazda CX-9 Sport

2011 Mazda CX-9 Sport
$31,320

Significant advantages of the CX-9 Sport (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Number of rows of seating: 3 vs 2
  • Rear air conditioning comes standard
  • More seats: 7 vs 5

Significant disadvantages of the CX-9 Sport (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Only has four-wheel drive: all-wheel drive vs four-wheel drive
  • Significantly longer braking distance from 60mph: 137 ft vs 123 ft
  • Moon roof not available

common strengths of the CX-9 Sport and CR-V EX-L

  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
  • Both have lots of cupholders: 12 vs 8
arrow Compare the 2011 Mazda CX-9 Sport vs the 2011 Honda CR-V EX-L

2011 Toyota Sienna Limited

2011 Toyota Sienna Limited
$41,380

Significant advantages of the Sienna Limited (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Number of rows of seating: 3 vs 2
  • Safer in head-on crashes for the driver: 5 stars vs 4 stars
  • Significantly more cargo room: 150.0 ft3 vs 72.9 ft3

Significant disadvantages of the Sienna Limited (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Only has four-wheel drive: all-wheel drive vs four-wheel drive
  • Less safe in head-on crashes for the front passenger: 2 stars vs 3 stars
  • Rougher suspension: Semi-independent vs Independent

common strengths of the Sienna Limited and CR-V EX-L

  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
  • Both vehicles have above average braking abilities for this class of vehicle: 121 ft vs 123 ft
  • Both come standard with sun roofs
arrow Compare the 2011 Toyota Sienna Limited vs the 2011 Honda CR-V EX-L

compared to car competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the CR-V EX-L compared to car competitors include: it has much more cargo space (72.9 ft3 vs 14.7 ft3), has slightly more spacious back seats (48.0 ft3 vs 40.5 ft3), has better traction (four-wheel drive vs front-wheel drive), has electronic stability control for increased safety and slightly shorter braking distance from 60mph (123 ft vs 133 ft).

However, on average it is slightly less fuel efficient on the highway (27 mpg vs 34 mpg), lacks continously-variable transmission (traditional vs continuously variable), gets slightly less from a tank of gas in the city (321 miles vs 426 miles), gets significantly less from a tank of gas on the highway (413 miles vs 629 miles) and less safe in head-on collisions for the driver (4 stars vs 5 stars).

2011 Honda Accord EX-L

2011 Honda Accord EX-L
$30,525

Significant advantages of the Accord EX-L (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Many fewer trips to fill-up when driving on the highway: 629 miles vs 413 miles
  • Safer in head-on crashes for the front passenger: 5 stars vs 3 stars
  • Less chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 5 stars vs 4 stars

Significant disadvantages of the Accord EX-L (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Only has four-wheel drive: front-wheel drive vs four-wheel drive
  • Much less cargo room: 14.7 ft3 vs 72.9 ft3
  • Many fewer cupholders: 4 vs 8

common strengths of the Accord EX-L and CR-V EX-L

  • Both have spacious back seats: 45.2 ft3 vs 48.0 ft3
  • Good protection, only 5% chance of serious chest injuries in a crash: 5 stars vs 5 stars
  • Both come standard with sun roofs
arrow Compare the Accord EX-L vs the CR-V EX-L

2012 Nissan Altima 2.5 S

2012 Nissan Altima 2.5 S
$24,860

Significant advantages of the Altima 2.5 S (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Has continuously variable transmission: Continuously variable vs Traditional
  • Many fewer trips to fill-up when driving on the highway: 640 miles vs 413 miles
  • Many fewer trips to fill-up when driving in the city: 460 miles vs 321 miles

Significant disadvantages of the Altima 2.5 S (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Only has four-wheel drive: front-wheel drive vs four-wheel drive
  • Much less cargo room: 8.2 ft3 vs 72.9 ft3
  • Many fewer gears: Continuously variable vs 5

common strengths of the Altima 2.5 S and CR-V EX-L

  • Good protection, only 5% chance of serious chest injuries in a crash: 5 stars vs 5 stars
  • Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
  • Child door locks come standard
arrow Compare the 2012 Nissan Altima 2.5 S vs the 2011 Honda CR-V EX-L

2011 Toyota Venza

2011 Toyota Venza
$31,160

Significant advantages of the Venza (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Safer in side crashes for the driver: 5 stars vs 3 stars
  • More airbags: 6 vs 5
  • Faster 0-60 mph time: 6.9 seconds vs 9.2 seconds

Significant disadvantages of the Venza (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Only has four-wheel drive: all-wheel drive vs four-wheel drive
  • Significantly longer braking distance from 60mph: 137 ft vs 123 ft
  • Less safe in head-on crashes for the front passenger: 2 stars vs 3 stars

common strengths of the Venza and CR-V EX-L

  • Lots of cargo room: 70.1 ft3 vs 72.9 ft3
  • Both have good drivetrains for driving off-road or in poor weather: all-wheel drive vs four-wheel drive
  • Both have spacious back seats: 52.5 ft3 vs 48.0 ft3
arrow Compare the 2011 Toyota Venza vs the 2011 Honda CR-V EX-L

2011 Chevrolet Aveo LT

2011 Chevrolet Aveo LT
$14,860

Significant advantages of the Aveo LT (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Significantly better highway mileage: 35 mpg vs 27 mpg
  • Rear spoiler

Significant disadvantages of the Aveo LT (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Only has four-wheel drive: front-wheel drive vs four-wheel drive
  • Much less cargo room: 12.4 ft3 vs 72.9 ft3
  • No electronic stability control

common strengths of the Aveo LT and CR-V EX-L

  • Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
  • Child door locks come standard
arrow Compare the 2011 Chevrolet Aveo LT vs the 2011 Honda CR-V EX-L

2011 Chrysler 200 LX

2011 Chrysler 200 LX
$19,995

Significant advantages of the 200 LX (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Significantly faster 0-60 mph time: 6.4 seconds vs 9.2 seconds
  • Significantly fewer trips to fill-up when driving on the highway: 507 miles vs 413 miles
  • Significantly faster 1/4 mile time: 14.9 s s @ 94.9 mph mph vs 16.9 s s @ 82.9 mph mph

Significant disadvantages of the 200 LX (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Only has four-wheel drive: front-wheel drive vs four-wheel drive
  • Much less cargo room: 13.6 ft3 vs 72.9 ft3
  • Leather not available

common strengths of the 200 LX and CR-V EX-L

  • Both have spacious back seats: 45.0 ft3 vs 48.0 ft3
  • Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
  • Child door locks come standard
arrow Compare the 2011 Chrysler 200 LX vs the 2011 Honda CR-V EX-L

2012 Volkswagen GLI 2.0T

2012 Volkswagen GLI 2.0T
$24,265

Significant advantages of the GLI 2.0T (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Much better highway mileage: 43 mpg vs 27 mpg
  • GLI 2.0T's Turbocharger increases power output: Turbocharger vs None
  • Significantly better city mileage: 31 mpg vs 21 mpg

Significant disadvantages of the GLI 2.0T (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Only has four-wheel drive: front-wheel drive vs four-wheel drive
  • Power locks not available
  • Keyless entry not available

common strengths of the GLI 2.0T and CR-V EX-L

  • Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
arrow Compare the 2012 Volkswagen GLI 2.0T vs the 2011 Honda CR-V EX-L

compared to luxury car competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the CR-V EX-L compared to luxury car competitors include: it is slightly more fuel efficient in the city (21 mpg vs 17 mpg), is slightly more fuel efficient on the highway (27 mpg vs 24 mpg), costs less ($28,905 vs $56,035), has much more cargo space (72.9 ft3 vs 13.8 ft3) and has slightly more spacious back seats (48.0 ft3 vs 43.8 ft3).

However, on average it is significantly more sluggish (19.7 lb/hp vs 13.7 lb/hp), gets slightly less from a tank of gas on the highway (413 miles vs 463 miles), is slightly less powerful (180 HP @ 6,800 RPM vs 300 HP @ 6,300 RPM), has slightly less spacious front seats (52.9 ft3 vs 55.3 ft3) and has a much shorter-lasting basic warranty (3 year vs 4 year).

2011 Acura RL

2011 Acura RL
$56,035

Significant advantages of the RL (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Much longer basic warranty: 50,000 mile vs 36,000 mile
  • Much longer-lasting basic warranty: 4 year vs 3 year
  • Passenger power seats comes standard

Significant disadvantages of the RL (vs the CR-V EX-L)

  • Much less cargo room: 13.8 ft3 vs 72.9 ft3
  • Only has four-wheel drive: all-wheel drive vs four-wheel drive
  • Worse city mileage: 17 mpg vs 21 mpg

common strengths of the RL and CR-V EX-L

  • Both will do well in poor weather or off-road conditions: all-wheel drive vs four-wheel drive
  • People mover: 5 vs 5
  • Both come standard with sun roofs
arrow Compare the 2011 Acura RL vs the 2011 Honda CR-V EX-L