Two significantly similar cars, no doubt about that. Still, each one has something different to offer. Having both cars powered by diesel 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 4-cylinder, 16-valves 150hp 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 7% 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. That's the official data, 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. The same official information place 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 2.7, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.9 out of 5.

Honda is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.4 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 190 kilometers per hour, exactly the same as the other car does. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 6.3 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (45 mpg), in combined cycle.

Honda is apparently more reliable, not too much, but just enough. 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... It's really tough to make a final decision here, but if I'd need to, I'd say Honda. Nevertheless, let's not forget that people have different preferences and needs, so what really counts is your personal feel. I'm only here to help. In case you have two minutes to spare I invite you to define your needs, desires and budget and see which car would be chosen by the virtual adviser™, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.