Honda CR-V 2.0 S AT (2015) vs Nissan NV350 Urvan Standard M/T (2018)
A full spec-by-spec comparison of Honda CR-V 2.0 S AT (2015) vs Nissan NV350 Urvan Standard M/T (2018) — engine, performance, dimensions, features and price, with the differences highlighted to help you decide.
| Specification | Honda CR-V 2.0 S AT (2015) Honda ₱1,503,000 |
Nissan NV350 Urvan Standard M/T (2018)
Nissan
₱1,570,000
|
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Model Year | 2015 | 2018 |
| Warranty | 100,000kms/3-years | 3-years/ 100,000km |
| Availability | Discontinued | Current |
| Engine & Drivetrain | ||
| Engine Type | Inline-4 | Inline-4 |
| Displacement | 1997cc | 2488cc |
| Valvetrain | SOHC 16-valve | DOHC 16-valve |
| Aspiration | Naturally Aspirated, i-VTEC | Turbocharged |
| Fuel Type | Gas | Diesel |
| Max Power | 153 PS @ 6500 rpm | 129 PS @ 3200 rpm |
| Max Torque | 190 Nm @ 4300 rpm | 356 Nm @ 1400 - 2000 rpm |
| Transmission | 5-Speed A/T | 5-Speed M/T |
| Drivetrain | 2WD | RWD |
| Compression Ratio | — | 15:1 |
| Performance & Economy | ||
| 0–60 mph | no | — |
| 0–100 km/h | no | — |
| Top Speed | no | — |
| Fuel Economy (City) | no | — |
| Fuel Economy (Highway) | no | — |
| Fuel Economy (Combined) | no | — |
| Emission Standard | Euro4 | — |
| Body & Dimensions | ||
| Body Type | SUV | Van |
| Segment | J | Van |
| Construction | Unibody | Body on Frame |
| Doors | 5 | 3 |
| Seating Capacity | 2+3 | 15 |
| Length (mm) | 4582 | 4695 |
| Width (mm) | 1820 | 1695 |
| Height (mm) | 1685 | 1990 |
| Wheelbase (mm) | 2620 | 2555 |
| Curb Weight (kg) | 1485 | 2076 |
| Fuel Tank (L) | 58 | 65 |
| Exterior Colors | — | Gun Metallic, Brilliant Silver, Pearl White, Alpine White, Topaz Brown, Graphite Black |
| Chassis, Wheels & Brakes | ||
| Front Suspension | MacPherson w/ Stabilizer | Torsion Beam |
| Rear Suspension | Double Wishbone w/ Stabilizer | Rigid Axle, Leaf Spring |
| Front Wheels | 17x7 | 15 steel |
| Rear Wheels | 17x7 | 15 steel |
| Front Tires | 225/65 R17 | 195/70/R15 |
| Rear Tires | 225/65 R17 | 195/70/R15 |
| Front Brakes | Disc | Disc |
| Rear Brakes | Disc | Drum |
| Steering Type | EPS | Hydraulic |
| Steering Column | tilt + tele | Tilt |
| Tire Pressure Monitoring | No | No |
| Differential Lock | No | No |
| Safety | ||
| Anti-lock Braking (ABS) | Yes | Yes |
| Electronic Brakeforce Distribution | Yes | Yes |
| Brake Assist | No | No |
| Parking Sensors | No | No |
| Stability Control | Yes | No |
| Traction Control | Yes | No |
| Vehicle Dynamic Control | No | No |
| Forward Collision Mitigation | No | No |
| Blind Spot Warning | No | No |
| Hill Start Assist | Yes | No |
| Hill Descent Control | No | No |
| Auto Stop/Start | No | No |
| Driver Airbag | Yes | No |
| Knee Airbag | No | No |
| Passenger Airbag | Yes | No |
| Front Curtain Airbags | No | No |
| Rear Curtain Airbags | No | No |
| Rear Side Airbags | Yes | No |
| Engine Immobilizer | Yes | No |
| Security Alarm | Yes | No |
| Door Locking | Central Locking | Central Locking |
| Comfort & Convenience | ||
| Air Conditioning | Dual Zone Climate Control | Manual Aircon w/ rear independent controls |
| Rear A/C Vents | Yes | No |
| Seat Material | Leather | Fabric |
| Parking Brake | Foot Brake | Manual |
| Key Type | Smart Entry | Keyless Entry |
| Push-Button Start | Yes | No |
| Cruise Control | Yes | No |
| Multi-Info Display | Yes | Yes |
| Paddle Shifters | Yes | No |
| Reverse Camera | Yes | No |
| Auto Headlights | No | No |
| Power Windows | Yes | Yes |
| Power Seats | No | No |
| Remote Trunk Release | No | No |
| Eco Mode | Yes | No |
| Antenna | no | yes |
| Infotainment & Audio | ||
| Speakers | 6 | 4 |
| Touchscreen | Yes | No |
| Navigation | No | No |
| Bluetooth | Yes | No |
| Apple CarPlay | No | No |
| Android Auto | No | No |
| USB | Yes | No |
| AUX Input | Yes | No |
| AM/FM Radio | Yes | No |
| CD Player | Yes | No |
| DVD Player | No | No |
| MP3 Playback | Yes | No |
| iPod Support | No | No |
| SD Card Slot | No | No |
| Lighting | ||
| Headlights | HID Projector | Halogen |
| Fog Lights | Yes | Yes |
| Daytime Running Lights | Yes | No |
Honda CR-V 2.0 S AT (2015) vs Nissan NV350 Urvan Standard M/T (2018): which should you buy?
The Honda CR-V 2.0 S AT (2015) and Nissan NV350 Urvan Standard M/T (2018) serve completely different purposes. The CR-V is a compact crossover SUV with a gas engine (153 PS, 190 Nm), front-wheel drive, and automatic transmission – ideal for daily commuting, family use, and paved roads. It offers a car-like driving experience but is discontinued. The NV350 is a body-on-frame van with a turbo diesel engine (129 PS, 356 Nm), rear-wheel drive, and manual transmission – built for heavy cargo or passenger transport, with massive low-end torque for hauling. It is still in production. Price difference is minimal (₱1,503,000 vs ₱1,570,000), but the NV350 is newer (2018 vs 2015). Choose the CR-V if you prioritize comfort, highway cruising, and car-like handling; choose the NV350 if you need a workhorse for loads, conversion, or off-road capability. The NV350's diesel engine provides significantly more torque (356 Nm vs 190 Nm) but less horsepower, and the manual transmission may be less convenient in traffic. The CR-V is better for urban driving and passenger comfort, while the NV350 excels in utility and versatility for a Filipino buyer's needs.
Frequently asked questions
Which is cheaper between the Honda CR-V and Nissan NV350?
The Honda CR-V 2.0 S AT (2015) is priced at ₱1,503,000, while the Nissan NV350 Urvan Standard M/T (2018) is ₱1,570,000. The CR-V is slightly cheaper by ₱67,000, but it is a 2015 model and discontinued.
Which vehicle has more power and torque?
The Honda CR-V produces 153 PS and 190 Nm of torque, while the Nissan NV350 has 129 PS but a much higher 356 Nm of torque. The NV350 is far stronger for hauling due to its diesel turbo engine, whereas the CR-V has more horsepower for highway speed.
Which is better for daily commuting in the city?
The Honda CR-V is better for city commuting because it has an automatic transmission, smoother ride, and is designed for passenger comfort. The Nissan NV350's manual transmission and body-on-frame construction make it less convenient in heavy traffic.
Which is more practical for cargo or passenger transport?
The Nissan NV350 is more practical for cargo or passenger transport due to its van body, diesel torque, and body-on-frame construction. It can carry more weight and is often used for commercial purposes. The CR-V is a compact SUV with limited cargo space by comparison.