Honda Crossroad specs: four versions, one generation
Two versions are named 1.8 AT and two are named 2.0 AT. They are not duplicates: distinguish them by drive and, where the data differ, by power peak, torque, displacement, 0–100 km/h, and kerb weight.
| Version | Drive | hp (rpm) | Nm (rpm) | Displacement, cc | Fuel | Cylinders / layout | Boost | Gearbox | 0–100 km/h | Kerb weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.8 AT | FWD | 140 (5700) | 173 (4300) | 1798 | Gasoline, 95 | 4 Inline | No | Automatic 5 | 12 s | not measured |
| 1.8 AT | AWD | 140 (6300) | 174 (4300) | 1799 | Gasoline, 95 | 4 Inline | No | Automatic 5 | 13 s | 1480 kg |
| 2.0 AT | AWD | 150 (6200) | 193 (4200) | 1997 | Gasoline, 95 | 4 Inline | No | Automatic 5 | 11.6 s | 1500 kg |
| 2.0 AT | FWD | 150 (6200) | 193 (4200) | 1997 | Gasoline, 95 | 4 Inline | No | Automatic 5 | 10.8 s | 1430 kg |
Two versions are named 1.8 AT and two are named 2.0 AT. They are not duplicates: distinguish them by drive and, where the data differ, by power peak, torque, displacement, 0–100 km/h, and kerb weight.
Which engine: 1.8 AT vs 2.0 AT
The 2.0 AT engines are 150 hp and 193 Nm from 1997 cc. The 1.8 AT engines are 140 hp from 1798 cc (FWD) or 1799 cc (AWD), with 173 Nm (FWD) or 174 Nm (AWD). That is +10 hp and +19 to +20 Nm for 199 extra cc (FWD: 1997 − 1798) or 198 extra cc (AWD: 1997 − 1799).
Specific output goes the other way. 1.8 AT FWD: 140 / 1.798 ≈ 77.9 hp per litre. 1.8 AT AWD: 140 / 1.799 ≈ 77.8 hp per litre. 2.0 AT (both drives): 150 / 1.997 ≈ 75.1 hp per litre. The smaller engine is the denser one; the 2.0 AT buys displacement and torque, not a higher specific output.
Bore and stroke: both 1.8 AT versions are 81 × 87.3 mm; both 2.0 AT versions are 81 × 96.9 mm. Same 81 mm bore, 9.6 mm more stroke on the 2.0 AT. Peak torque arrives 100 rpm earlier on the 2.0 AT (4200 vs 4300). Peak power is at 5700 rpm on 1.8 AT FWD, 6300 rpm on 1.8 AT AWD, and 6200 rpm on both 2.0 AT versions.
Which drive: FWD vs AWD
On the 1.8 AT, FWD reaches 100 km/h in 12 s; AWD takes 13 s — 1.0 s slower for AWD. On the 2.0 AT, FWD is 10.8 s and AWD is 11.6 s — 0.8 s slower for AWD.
Kerb weight is not measured for 1.8 AT FWD. 1.8 AT AWD is 1480 kg. 2.0 AT AWD is 1500 kg (+20 kg vs 1.8 AT AWD). 2.0 AT FWD is 1430 kg: 70 kg lighter than 2.0 AT AWD and 50 kg lighter than 1.8 AT AWD.
Weight per horsepower (where kerb weight is measured): 2.0 AT FWD 1430 / 150 = 9.53 kg/hp; 2.0 AT AWD 1500 / 150 = 10.00 kg/hp; 1.8 AT AWD 1480 / 140 = 10.57 kg/hp. The 2.0 AT FWD is the lightest per horsepower in the data.
Performance, mpg, and what is not measured
Fastest 0–100 km/h: 2.0 AT FWD at 10.8 s. Next: 2.0 AT AWD at 11.6 s (+0.8 s). Then 1.8 AT FWD at 12 s (+1.2 s vs the 2.0 AT FWD). Slowest: 1.8 AT AWD at 13 s (+2.2 s vs 2.0 AT FWD, +1.4 s vs 2.0 AT AWD, +1.0 s vs 1.8 AT FWD).
Top speed is measured only for 1.8 AT FWD: 170 km/h. For 1.8 AT AWD, 2.0 AT AWD, and 2.0 AT FWD, top speed is not measured.
City, highway, and combined fuel consumption are not measured on any version. CO2 is not measured. Eco class is not measured. There is no mpg figure in the data, so economy cannot decide the purchase — only tank size, which is 50 litres on all four.
Dimensions, weight, and clearance
Ground clearance is 185 mm on every version. Fuel tank is 50 litres on every version. Wheel sizes are not measured on any version.
Gross vehicle weight is not measured on any version. Kerb weight: 2.0 AT FWD 1430 kg; 1.8 AT AWD 1480 kg; 2.0 AT AWD 1500 kg; 1.8 AT FWD not measured.
Front suspension is Independent, spring on all four. Rear suspension is Independent, spring on 1.8 AT AWD, 2.0 AT AWD, and 2.0 AT FWD; on 1.8 AT FWD the rear is not measured. Front brakes are Disc on all four. Rear brakes are Disc on the three versions that list them; on 1.8 AT FWD rear brakes are not measured.
Which Honda Crossroad version to choose
If 0–100 km/h is the criterion: choose 2.0 AT FWD (10.8 s). It is 0.8 s quicker than 2.0 AT AWD, 1.2 s quicker than 1.8 AT FWD, and 2.2 s quicker than 1.8 AT AWD. It also has the lowest measured kerb weight (1430 kg) and the lowest kg/hp (9.53).
If you want 150 hp and AWD: choose 2.0 AT AWD. Versus 1.8 AT AWD you gain 10 hp, 19 Nm, 198 cc, and 1.4 s on 0–100 km/h, at +20 kg kerb weight (1500 vs 1480). Versus 2.0 AT FWD you keep the same 150 hp and 193 Nm but add 70 kg and 0.8 s to 0–100 km/h.
If you want AWD at 140 hp: choose 1.8 AT AWD. Versus 1.8 AT FWD you lose 1.0 s to 100 km/h (13 vs 12) and you do not get a measured top speed (170 km/h is listed only on the FWD 1.8 AT). Torque is 1 Nm higher (174 vs 173). Displacement is 1 cc higher (1799 vs 1798). Power peak is 600 rpm higher (6300 vs 5700).
If you want FWD at 140 hp: choose 1.8 AT FWD. It is the only version with a measured top speed (170 km/h). It is 1.2 s slower to 100 km/h than 2.0 AT FWD and 1.0 s quicker than 1.8 AT AWD. Kerb weight, rear suspension, rear brakes, and fuel use are not measured — do not treat those blanks as “none”.
What extra displacement buys: moving from either 1.8 AT to the matching-drive 2.0 AT is +10 hp and about +20 Nm. On FWD that cuts 1.2 s from 0–100 km/h (12.0 → 10.8). On AWD that cuts 1.4 s (13.0 → 11.6). Specific output falls by about 2.7 hp per litre. Stroke grows from 87.3 mm to 96.9 mm; bore stays 81 mm.
What AWD costs in these numbers: +1.0 s (1.8 AT) or +0.8 s (2.0 AT) to 100 km/h, and on the 2.0 AT +70 kg. There is no second generation in the data, so there is no later restyle, no later gearbox, and no later tank or clearance to wait for. Production of all four versions runs October 1993–December 1998.
Practical ranking from the given numbers only: 2.0 AT FWD for the shortest 0–100 km/h and the lowest measured mass per horsepower; 2.0 AT AWD if AWD is required and 150 hp is the target; 1.8 AT FWD if 140 hp and a measured 170 km/h top speed are enough; 1.8 AT AWD if AWD is required and 140 hp is enough. Fuel consumption, CO2, wheels, and gross weight cannot break a tie: they are not measured.