We are contemplating between this two:


Honda HRV V Turbo spec vs Toyota Cross V 1.8L


Any thoughts? Feedback ? Any users here, what do you like or hate so far?

Ativa

My wife is using HRV Turbo V Spec and my mother in law is using Cross V Spec

Want power? HRV is miles and miles ahead
Want space? Cross is miles and miles ahead
Want bootspace? Cross is miles and miles ahead
Want better safety feature? Both on par with pros and cons for each. Cross has Rear cross traffic alert + Blindspot monitoring, but Honda's active / passive alert is much better.
Want a more refined driving experience? I find Cross is the better/smoother ride than HRV. But no power at all. Long distance drive is comfortable but boring for Cross. HRV is fun and fast.
Want a fuel sipping machine? I find that both are on par when driven conservatively.
I hate both Head Unit, but Toyota's version is a tad worse than Honda.

HRV because i hate the foot parking brake

Ah yes, totally forgot this part. Yeah, the foot parking brake is very bodoh. My MIL regret not waiting for the HEV version coz that has the EPB.

HRV teboq

cross.
I can live with the lethargic power and foot parking brake, as I prefer a comfortable drive.

both cars have pros & cons
but if looking solely at after sales service, I'll pick Cross

HRV turbo engine fuel consumption less than Cross 1.8 NA? Iya ke?

TS is many people? We?

tebu all the way.... powwwaaarrrrrr

if want Cross and can hold back a bit, wait for the facelift next year

rumoured 2.0 hybrid system + EPB finally

Cross hybrid also foot brake unfortunately

This post has been edited by ZeneticX: Nov 23 2023, 07:17 PM

tumbang

interested to knw what is the fuel consumption for HRV turbo ? any car owner here ?

bigger one will do

Both are also ok. Just see your preference. But do your research first, as Honda these few years having allot of issues with quality.

Cuba pakai HRV itu lama sikit. Atau any Honda Malaysia cars.

Overall FC - meaning mixture of city driving and highway driving , turbo may equal to NA, but sometimes higher.
City driving - Better take NA. If HRV, take 1.5L NA also enough. When one frequently want to rush in traffic, turbo will consume more.
Highway driving - Turbo will consume lesser fuel if the right foot is light.

Speaking from experience . Having both Exora turbo (yes I know its different segment) and family having HRV 1.8L (previous gen) .

BTW, my bro in law has a CRV 1.5L turbo and that thing consumes plenty of fuel almost similar to my Exora, in full town driving.

This post has been edited by SleeplessEyes: Nov 24 2023, 07:55 AM

Power & handling - Hrv

comfort , reliability & after sales service - Cross

No car is perfect, but depends on your need & want

if one can afford it, but one of each.
Would be nice to have both the HRV V and a Cross GR Sport in the porch.

Yes, you're right. The fuel consumption should measure under same background environment.
Such comparison should put background before hand to justify the conclusion. Otherwise it only invite more people come to debate.

Both car i will reject, very minimal safety features & outdated tech. if solely driving in city or small town, i will go for BYD Otto. EV is the way to go now for short driving.

If long range, similar budget can get Mazda CX5, Subaru Xv, Recon Toyota CHR 1.2T (but smaller) also anyway better in term of safety, chassis, handling, technology compare to the 2. A lot of discount are available now so you might be surprise some of the competitors pricing is quite near.

Once the turbo kicks in, that's where all the FC goes. HRV 1.8L (previous gen) ~450KM+ in city, ~600KM highway.

New HRV still have the Steering Deck issue?

Most modern electronic steering rack will encounter issue, even Toyota also. No way to run from it.

corolla cross hybrid, IF I'm going to choose between this 2, I will go for corolla cross hybrid variant.

maybe just wait for 2nd gen cross, due soon ....

elaborate?

Post #3 sums it up pretty well. I tested both and ended up with the Cross Hybrid for my mother.

Personal preference if I were buying for my own use:- if petrol model would take HRV Turbo, if hybrid would take Cross Hybrid.

Some things to add:
1. HRV has really poor road/tyre noise insulation compared to the Cross. Like they just filled the tyre wells with surat khabar lama and called it a day.
2. Both head units are meh, but HRV at least has wireless CarPlay. Cross needs a cable.
3. HRV, if not mistaken, only offers powered tailgate on the RS Hybrid model (I could be wrong, so please check yourself), while on the Cross you will get it in both V and Hybrid models

This post has been edited by dev/numb: Nov 25 2023, 01:05 AM

Liked cross more due space. But Honda HRV engine+turbo powerful.

toyota corolla cross would be my choice

Safety rating you go research how good Honda & Toyota when compared to like Mazda & Subaru
Honda HRV until today side impact still the archellis heel, some country dont even have 5 star rating.

Regarding outdated people already start moving to EV thus why i mentioned BYD Otto. If a lot of long distance & highway travelling, Mazda CX5 2.0 low spec. anytime more better compare to them in term of overall drivability (6AT gearbox). Their Skyactive engine is one of the most high tech & efficient engine available from Japan, beating most of the competitors nowadays.

This post has been edited by littlefire: Nov 27 2023, 09:06 AM

Until today most Corolla Cross hybrid owners i met regretted. Once you drive up to Genting or Cameron Highlands and back, they just pass it to their wifes for kids & market shopping.

On paper like very power with combine, but in reality felt very underpower when driving up hills...

This post has been edited by littlefire: Nov 27 2023, 09:11 AM

Even with power mode on?

It really depend on your own driving style, different ppl got different needs and views on same item.

To me, Cross 1.8V is underpower, but if you just want to have good ride and you always drive with reasonable speed within limit, then cross is definitely better compare to HRV turbo, in term of fuel consumption (because underpower) and cabin quietness. Service maintenance also more simple, just follow the schedule send to SC every 10k km. Honda turbo engine need to follow the indicator on meter.

HRV turbo looks more aggressive, cheaper on road tax, the half digital meter also look more nicer compare to Toyota. But if you buy honda, have to bear with CVT noise and road noise on high speed, all honda car just born with it. Buying Honda is to floor the pedal with CVT and engine noise, and it's acceleration always make you smile, lol. If wan quiet then go for Toyota.

the point of hybrid on normal car is to save fuel whenever you can, especially city drive not hyper car kind of hybrid bruh.

share with me how many times normal citizen go up genting for fun? i go up there once a year now since zero touge nowadays. If i were to go up there vroom2, i go with different car.

The main point is that i will choose it for FC since my daily now is within (8.5l/100km ~ 10l/100km) with my driving style.

This post has been edited by babisotong: Nov 27 2023, 11:20 AM

Cross interior is boring

If you choose FC & city drive, better just go for EV like BYD Otto. Since hybrid cars 2nd value also low when sell, rather get EV.

well the question is HRV vs Toyota Cross..

Toyota Corolla Cross, Honda build quality and steering rack problem is terrible.. of cos look wise and design be it interior or exterior Honda better but if you want to drive long and lesser problem you would never go wrong with Toyota.

well said bro , you never go wrong with toyota , currently driving a camry acv30 2003 ( 20 years old car ) still running like a champ

BYD Otto second hand value good? 😄

Hybrid = Low
EV = Low
Since both also low why not choose the best?

EV cheaper to run, got instant torque/power and less parts to worry compare to hybrid
Since city drive only, EV can get you anyway within the city range and a lot of shopping center also got charging point.

on Fuel consumption:

High speed stability: Cross

oh, and the Honda 1.5T has oil monitor, meaning when it is due, the dash will countdown for oil change... I heard it can be between 6k to 8k km for oil change. Cross doesn't give you that kind of thing...


I'd prefer a Cross

This post has been edited by alexei: Nov 28 2023, 09:24 AM

Wait until the time you need to change the dead battery. Good luck.

if the 1.5T HRV is using same suspension and absorbers as the RS Hybrid EHEV, then high speed i am 100% sure will > cross

cuz the car is retardedly stiff (and harsh)
first gen HRV is overly soft, so from complaints and feedback, Honda Malaysia Lazy engineering > max stiff on the other end of the spectrum. but that will mean highway stability (and to an extent, cornering, assuming smooth roads) will be very good, no floaty feel at all.

EV resale value after warranty period will always be low, very low.

Because the used EV buyer need to pay for the EV battery replacement cost, or prepared to pay for the EV battery cost.

BYD otto when new, say 165k, after 5 years say 50k. So the buyer needs to pay 50k for the car, and probably 60-80k on top for the EV battery subsequently.

wow, really? here no have HRV hybrid for test drive, which we wanted
so, HRV 1.5T should consider changing for the RS shocks? what are they? stiffer than RS Ultra?

No idea

You can't estimate with just RPM without consider load.

The only absolutely true measure is the air flow throw the throttle body (hence TCR, GT3 racing using air restrictor in their BoP Balance of Performance, which is basically a standard size cone for every team).

Modern engine varies a lot around the ideal 14.7 ratio, even more so for the small displacement turbo with ultra lean (stratified) combustion mode at low load on both low/high rpm.
On the flip side, on high load extra fuels are injected just to cool the engine for both NA/Turbo, just more severe in turbo case.

My car easily varies between 20km+/l to no more than 5km/l.

Rule of thumb, don't think of the rpm, think of your own throttle input (although drive by wire means it is also damped by ECU).

This post has been edited by constant_weight: Nov 28 2023, 12:45 PM

Stupid BYD EV maintenance is more expensive that all type of car.

Same bro, u tot hybrid dont have battery? Some more need to worry even more especially with the engine still remain.
2x maintenance compare to just EV.

thanks, I hear you, went through some of the BoP publications, interesting read, almost rocket science for me

As a people carrier, hrv is essentially a four seater as the center seat is really raised, not comfortable for an adult. Cross has a more traditional bench seat that is flat across.

Cross is more comfortable but body roll is noticeable, not too bad though. Hrv is kinda harsh, it was very evident on bumpy roads during my test drive.

Nah I would say the resale value of EV will be closely related to the remaining battery health (state of degradation). An EV with a battery health of 90% will always have a better resale value than an EV with 80% of battery health. Moreover, it is not necessary for second hand EV buyer to replace the battery if it's not dead or behaving abnormally because in most cases it's only the range (second hand buyer gets lower range than a new car, that's all) that will be affected due to the degradation of the battery.

This post has been edited by HotshotS: Nov 29 2023, 01:45 PM

Speaking about Cross 1.8

Turbo will always win in low end torque . NA on the other hand needs to rev harder. So yes I know how it feels feeling underpower.
Like example my Exora. It has 140PS , the same horsepower as the HRV 1.8L, but torque output is way more than HRV.
On highway, if wanna overtake , the Exora does it much stronger with lesser effort.

Wheras the HRV 1.8, needs to rev 3000 above , and even that also the torque feels flat. I think it's typical Honda. Me not the type want to rev high to the moon, just to get power.

Drove my bro in law's CRV 1.5 Turbo, same engine in the HRV turbo, yes its turbo but probably ECO mode makes it rather "lag" like the HRV eco mode.

For modest drive and better FC all rounder, I always advice go for NA.
Turbo is for power, not prioritized for fuel economy. Turbo roadtax cheaper but the higher FC, unfortunately, will quickly eat the road tax savings.

This post has been edited by SleeplessEyes: Nov 29 2023, 05:16 PM

A true ECO function is supposed to be like that. Not those you'll find in Myvi or Axia. Another thing is Honda CVT if you don't step, you won't get power. But at the same time is, the more you step the closer to burning your wallet (CVT Belt Putus) or CVT overheating. Turbo is good at 1.5L for ~2L engine, but for me is the maintenance and the fuel consumption that brings it down.

Exora which gen?

Yes, even honda 1.5 L Turbo also need to run at high rpm if you want to get its power. Like my wife's fifth gen crv, on paper it show turbo start working once rpm hit 2k, but from 2k-2.5k I still feel it is like NA engine with a little more power delivered, unless you push rpm straight above 2.5k, the higher the better, it will still have 1-2 seconds of power lag then only you can feel its power and fast acceleration, and the engine itself also seen like keen to keep at high rpm, it will very soon jump into 4k-4.5k rpm unless you release pedal, but the power delivery very good, sekejap saja from 60kmh-140kmh. The power lag also happened to my civic fe, but it is not so obvious partly due to it is lighter and it's turbo start working at 1.7k rpm.

I don't have HRV turbo, only test drive it before, but I feel new HRV turbo almost same like the civic fe, it's turbo is smoother compare to old 1.5t being used in fifth gen crv.

And if you always drive it with high speed, like 140-180 for long distance drive, think the mileage can only last at most 6k, my civic tried it before, need to service after 5.6k, as I always floor the pedal in first two mths after getting the car, lol. And FC can go below 8km/litre. Nowadays drive slowly, so both civic and crv can score 10/12km per litre of petrol, 70% city drive, at most 90-110kmh, mileage can last until 9k plus, still short with 1k km due to traffic jam. And the funny thing is, my wife and I both will also choose to drive the fifth gen crv instead of FE, due to high ground clearance, lol

i'd buy corolla cross if they facelifted it

need to get rid of the foot parking brake

refresh the dash

ok, but not always true. Consider overall package, different transmission type can be as big as 3-5%. Tyre, engine oil viscosity, weight, aero all add up.

My 204PS 1.6T is more fuel efficient than 2.0NA, and that's Skyactiv not some ancient old NA.

This is with combined urban/highway usage, long term average speed on trip computer 33-34km/h.

Of course 100-200km/h pedal to metal, the turbo easily consume 2x fuel vs the 2.0NA. But I'm not that crazy to do that day in day out.

The only catch is the current owner long term FC is 0.8-1L/100km more than me, been asking how I did that.
Only explanation is my rather fast corner with smooth steering input, so I need less re-acceleration. Downside is I always get outer tire wear, from econobox to heavy family saloon.

This post has been edited by constant_weight: Nov 30 2023, 10:16 PM

<Deleted>

This post has been edited by constant_weight: Nov 30 2023, 10:16 PM