2009 Honda CR-V vs. 2004 MCC Crossblade

To start off, 2009 Honda CR-V is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 MCC Crossblade. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 MCC Crossblade would be higher. At 2,354 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Honda CR-V is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Honda CR-V (166 HP) has 96 more horse power than 2004 MCC Crossblade. (70 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Honda CR-V should accelerate faster than 2004 MCC Crossblade. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Honda CR-V weights approximately 721 kg more than 2004 MCC Crossblade. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

Because 2004 MCC Crossblade is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2004 MCC Crossblade. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Honda CR-V, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2009 Honda CR-V (218 Nm @ 4200 RPM) has 116 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 MCC Crossblade. (102 Nm @ 3210 RPM). This means 2009 Honda CR-V will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 MCC Crossblade. 2009 Honda CR-V has automatic transmission and 2004 MCC Crossblade has manual transmission. 2004 MCC Crossblade will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Honda CR-V will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.

Compare all specifications: