Last Update: Mar. 28, 2020, 5:57 a.m.
Home >>> >>> Alfa Romeo Mito and Honda CR-Z

What is Better Alfa Romeo Mito or Honda CR-Z?

Exterior

Alfa Romeo Mito Honda CR-Z

11 reasons to buy Alfa Romeo Mito

Engine and transmission
More engine power

120 bhp vs 114 bhp

88 kw. vs 84 kw.

5% or 6 bhp. More power of car = more top speed.
More torque 206 nM vs 145 nM 30% or 61 nM. More torque = faster acceleration.
Performance
Faster acceleration from 0 to 60 mph 8.8 sec. vs 9.9 sec. 1.1 sec.
Fuel consumption
Less fuel consumption (Combined cycle) 46.27 mpg vs 56.46 mpg 22% or 10.19 mpg
Less fuel consumption (Highway) 56.46 mpg vs 64.13 mpg 14% or 7.67 mpg
Less fuel consumption (City) 34.91 mpg vs 46.27 mpg 33% or 11.36 mpg
Weight and capacity
More minimum boot capacity 270 liters vs 225 liters 17% or 45 liters
More capacity of fuel tank 45 liters vs 40 liters 11% or 5 liters
Warranty
More standard warranty - Mileage 994406 miles vs 93226 miles 91% or 901180 miles
Other specs
Less weight 1145 kg vs 1198 kg 5% or 53 kg Weight of the vehicle affects: fuel consumption, acceleration dynamic, braking distance, etc.
More seats 5 vs 4 1

8 reasons to buy Honda CR-Z

Engine and transmission
Better compression 10.4 vs 9.8 6% or 0.6 . The greater degree of compression = the less fuel need to produce the same power.
Piston diameter larger 73 mm vs 72 mm 1% or 1 mm larger. The larger diameter of cylinder = the greater filling ratio. Cons: increase emissions of toxic substances.
Piston stroke longer 89.4 mm vs 84 mm 6% or 5.4 mm. The longer stroke = lower fuel consumption and fewer emissions.
Performance
More top speed 124 mph vs 123 mph 1 mph
Emissions
Less CO2 emissions 73 g/mile vs 90 g/mile 23% or 17 g/mile
Higher european emission standard EURO 5 vs EURO 4 1 generation
Warranty
More warranty against corrosion 12 years vs 8 years 33% or 4 years
Other specs
Less turning radius 10 meters vs 11.3 meters 13% or 1.3 meters

Neutral reasons Alfa Romeo Mito vs. Honda CR-Z

Engine and transmission
Engine speed (RPM) 5000 RPM vs 6100 RPM 18% or 1100 less rpms.
Engine capacity 1368 cm3 vs 1497 cm3 9% or 129 cm3 less
Engine position Front transverse vs Front transverse
Cylinders location In line vs In line
Fuel supply Fuel injection with turbocharging vs Distributor fuel injection
Turbocharging Yes vs Yes
Speeds 5 vs 6 1 less
Dimensions
Length 4063 mm vs 4080 mm 0% or 17 mm shorter
Width 1720 mm vs 1740 mm 1% or 20 mm narrower
Height 1446 mm vs 1395 mm 4% or 51 mm higher
Wheels and tires
Wheelbase 2511 mm vs 2425 mm 3% or 86 mm more
Front tires size 195/55 R16 vs 195/55 R16
Rear tires size 195/55 R16 vs 195/55 R16
Type of wheels 16" steel vs 16" alloy wheels
*Specs may vary depending on configurations and year of production(taken parameters of last released versions)