Two significantly similar cars, no doubt about that. Still, each one has something different to offer. Having both cars powered by petrol engines and utilizing the 5-door suv body style within the same 'SUV' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (front for the Toyota and 4 x 4 in the case of the Honda). The first one has a Toyota-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 158hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 150hp engine designed by Honda.

A starting point here would be to take a look at the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests which were performed on both of the cars, with the same number of safety stars gained in the process. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the suv segment, which is generally a very good thing safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. On the other hand, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, CR-V offers a marginal difference of 5% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Honda does have a slight advantage, when all the models are taken into account. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Toyota with an average rating of 4.6, and models under the Honda badge with 4.7 out of 5. Independent research findings rank RAV4 as average reliability-wise, and CR-V is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as RAV4 rank it on average as 4.8, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.5 out of 5.

Both of the cars accelerate exactly the same, so we couldn't put one above the other. Car No. 2 is faster though, reaching top speed of 190 kilometers per hour, 5km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be RAV4, averaging around 7.4 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (38 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 11% difference compared to CR-V.

Toyota appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In my opinion, everything taken into account, CR-V offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. It all continues in the same direction, with Honda offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... No mistake, whatever you decide here, but I'd still go for the Toyota. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. I suggest you spend two more minutes in order to find out which car, based on your needs and budget, would be picked by the virtual adviser™, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.