Honda N-WGN: which version to buy
The Honda N-WGN to buy is the 0.7 CVT that matches how you actually drive: 64 hp turbo FWD if you want the shortest 0–100 km/h time in the catalogue (14.2 s on the first-generation car, 14.3 s after restyling); 58 hp FWD if you want the lightest kerb weight (820 kg before restyling, 840 kg after); AWD only if you need all-wheel drive, because it adds 50–70 kg and 1.2–4.0 s to 0–100 km/h depending …
The Honda N-WGN to buy is the 0.7 CVT that matches how you actually drive: 64 hp turbo FWD if you want the shortest 0–100 km/h time in the catalogue (14.2 s on the first-generation car, 14.3 s after restyling); 58 hp FWD if you want the lightest kerb weight (820 kg before restyling, 840 kg after); AWD only if you need all-wheel drive, because it adds 50–70 kg and 1.2–4.0 s to 0–100 km/h depending on the pair. Every listed version is named 0.7 CVT. They are told apart by horsepower (58 vs 64), drive (FWD vs AWD), and production window (November 2013 – May 2016 vs restyling June 2016 – June 2019). Body type on all of them is Mini 5-doors. Fuel is Gasoline, gearbox is Variable, displacement is 658 cc, tank is 30 L, CO2 is 89 g (as given). Top speed, fuel consumption, gross weight, wheel size, tyre size, rim size, battery size, and oil capacity are not measured in this dataset — they are not used as reasons to buy.
Honda N-WGN generations: what actually changed
The catalogue records one generation of Honda N-WGN with a restyling inside it, not two separate model lines. First-generation cars ran 2013-11-01 to 2016-05-31 (4 versions). The restyling ran 2016-06-01 to 2019-06-30 (4 versions). Searches for Honda N-WGN 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2019 therefore map to these two windows, not to extra generations.
What the restyling did not change. Engine family, names, and most hardware stay the same: 658 cc, 3 cylinders Inline, 4 valves per cylinder, Front, transverse, Distributed injection (multi-point), 95 fuel, Variable gearbox, Disc front / Drum rear brakes, Independent, spring front / Dependent, spring rear suspension. NA cars stay 58 hp (43 kW) at 7300 rpm and 65 Nm at 4700 rpm, compression 11.8, bore × stroke 64 × 68.2. Turbo cars stay 64 hp (47 kW) at 6000 rpm and 104 Nm at 2600 rpm, compression 9.2, boost Turbo. Tank 30 L and CO2 89 do not move.
What the restyling did change (arithmetic on the given numbers).
| Pair | First generation | Restyling | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.7 CVT 58 hp FWD kerb weight | 820 kg | 840 kg | +20 kg |
| 0.7 CVT 58 hp AWD kerb weight | 870 kg | 890 kg | +20 kg |
| 0.7 CVT 64 hp Turbo FWD kerb weight | 850 kg | 850 kg | 0 kg |
| 0.7 CVT 64 hp Turbo AWD kerb weight | 900 kg | 920 kg | +20 kg |
| 0.7 CVT 58 hp FWD 0–100 | 16.7 s | 16.7 s | 0 s |
| 0.7 CVT 58 hp AWD 0–100 | 18.3 s | 18.3 s | 0 s |
| 0.7 CVT 64 hp Turbo FWD 0–100 | 14.2 s | 14.3 s | +0.1 s |
| 0.7 CVT 64 hp Turbo AWD 0–100 | 15.4 s | 18.3 s | +2.9 s |
| 0.7 CVT 58 hp AWD ground clearance | 170 mm | 150 mm | −20 mm |
| 0.7 CVT 64 hp Turbo AWD ground clearance | 170 mm | 150 mm | −20 mm |
| FWD ground clearance (both engines) | 150 mm | 150 mm | 0 mm |
The restyling is therefore a heavier NA car, a slower Turbo AWD, and an AWD with 20 mm less ground clearance. It is not a more powerful engine, a different gearbox, or a larger tank. If the question is “2016–2019 Honda N-WGN vs 2013–2016,” the first generation wins on weight (three of four versions), Turbo AWD sprint, and AWD clearance. The restyling wins only if you specifically need a car built in the later window; the numbers do not show a performance upgrade.
Honda N-WGN specs: all 0.7 CVT versions side by side
| Version (name as in data) | Years | hp / kW | Nm | cc | Fuel | Cylinders / layout | Boost | Gearbox | Drive | 0–100 | Kerb | Clearance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.7 CVT | 2013–2016 | 58 / 43 | 65 | 658 | Gasoline | 3 Inline | not measured | Variable | FWD | 16.7 s | 820 kg | 150 mm |
| 0.7 CVT | 2013–2016 | 58 / 43 | 65 | 658 | Gasoline | 3 Inline | not measured | Variable | AWD | 18.3 s | 870 kg | 170 mm |
| 0.7 CVT | 2013–2016 | 64 / 47 | 104 | 658 | Gasoline | 3 Inline | Turbo | Variable | FWD | 14.2 s | 850 kg | 150 mm |
| 0.7 CVT | 2013–2016 | 64 / 47 | 104 | 658 | Gasoline | 3 Inline | Turbo | Variable | AWD | 15.4 s | 900 kg | 170 mm |
| 0.7 CVT | 2016–2019 | 58 / 43 | 65 | 658 | Gasoline | 3 Inline | not measured | Variable | FWD | 16.7 s | 840 kg | 150 mm |
| 0.7 CVT | 2016–2019 | 58 / 43 | 65 | 658 | Gasoline | 3 Inline | not measured | Variable | AWD | 18.3 s | 890 kg | 150 mm |
| 0.7 CVT | 2016–2019 | 64 / 47 | 104 | 658 | Gasoline | 3 Inline | Turbo | Variable | FWD | 14.3 s | 850 kg | 150 mm |
| 0.7 CVT | 2016–2019 | 64 / 47 | 104 | 658 | Gasoline | 3 Inline | Turbo | Variable | AWD | 18.3 s | 920 kg | 150 mm |
Boost on the 58 hp cars is not measured (no turbo label in the data). Top speed, city / highway / combined consumption, eco class, gross weight, and wheel / tyre / rim sizes are not measured on every row.
Honda N-WGN engine: 58 hp vs 64 hp Custom Turbo logic
People search “Honda N-WGN Custom turbo” and “horsepower.” In this dataset the turbo is the 64 hp 0.7 CVT, not a different model name. Same 658 cc, same 3 Inline layout.
- Specific output: 58 / 0.658 ≈ 88.1 hp per litre (NA). 64 / 0.658 ≈ 97.3 hp per litre (Turbo). Turbo is +6 hp and +9.2 hp/L.
- Torque: 104 − 65 = +39 Nm (+60%). Peak torque rpm drops from 4700 to 2600 (2100 rpm earlier).
- Compression: 11.8 (NA) vs 9.2 (Turbo) — a 2.6-point drop, consistent with Turbo.
- Power peak: 7300 rpm (NA) vs 6000 rpm (Turbo).
What the extra 6 hp buys in 0–100 km/h (same generation, same drive):
- First generation FWD: 16.7 − 14.2 = 2.5 s faster with Turbo (0.7 CVT 64 hp FWD vs 0.7 CVT 58 hp FWD).
- First generation AWD: 18.3 − 15.4 = 2.9 s faster with Turbo.
- Restyling FWD: 16.7 − 14.3 = 2.4 s faster with Turbo.
- Restyling AWD: 18.3 − 18.3 = 0 s. After restyling, Turbo AWD and NA AWD share 18.3 s. The turbo does not buy a sprint advantage on restyled AWD in these numbers.
Kerb-weight cost of the turbo (same generation, same drive):
- First generation FWD: 850 − 820 = +30 kg.
- First generation AWD: 900 − 870 = +30 kg.
- Restyling FWD: 850 − 840 = +10 kg.
- Restyling AWD: 920 − 890 = +30 kg.
Turbo FWD still has the best mass-to-power: 850 / 64 ≈ 13.3 kg per hp in both generations. NA FWD is 820 / 58 ≈ 14.1 kg/hp (first gen) or 840 / 58 ≈ 14.5 kg/hp (restyle). Restyled Turbo AWD is 920 / 64 ≈ 14.4 kg/hp — worse than first-gen NA FWD.
Buy the 64 hp 0.7 CVT if you want the measured 0–100 gap and the 39 Nm of extra torque, and you are looking at FWD (both generations) or first-generation AWD. Do not buy restyled Turbo AWD for speed: it matches NA AWD at 18.3 s while weighing 920 kg, the heaviest Honda N-WGN in the table.
Engine oil capacity in litres, oil grade, engine number location, and engine price are not measured. Displacement is 658 cc on every 0.7 CVT, not a different “engine cc” per trim.
Honda N-WGN 4WD / AWD: what the extra mass buys
Searches for Honda N-WGN 4WD map to the AWD 0.7 CVT rows. Drive labels in the data are FWD and AWD.
Weight of AWD vs FWD (same engine, same generation):
- 58 hp, first gen: 870 − 820 = +50 kg.
- 64 hp Turbo, first gen: 900 − 850 = +50 kg.
- 58 hp, restyle: 890 − 840 = +50 kg.
- 64 hp Turbo, restyle: 920 − 850 = +70 kg.
0–100 cost of AWD:
- 58 hp, both generations: 18.3 − 16.7 = +1.6 s.
- 64 hp Turbo, first gen: 15.4 − 14.2 = +1.2 s.
- 64 hp Turbo, restyle: 18.3 − 14.3 = +4.0 s.
Ground clearance: first-generation AWD is the only place clearance rises — 170 mm vs 150 mm FWD (+20 mm). After restyling, AWD is 150 mm, same as FWD. If you want AWD and the extra 20 mm, the car has to be a 2013-11-01 – 2016-05-31 0.7 CVT AWD (58 hp or 64 hp). A 2017–2019 AWD does not keep that clearance in this dataset.
Buy AWD only for the drive layout itself (and, on first-gen cars, 170 mm clearance). It never improves 0–100, never reduces kerb weight, and after restyling it does not raise ride height.
Honda N-WGN weight and dimensions: use kerb weight, not missing size data
Overall length, width, height, wheelbase, Custom dimensions, tyre size, rim size, wheel size, and battery size are not measured. Gross weight is not measured. The usable size-and-weight decision is kerb mass and clearance.
Lightest to heaviest:
1. 0.7 CVT 58 hp FWD, 2013–2016 — 820 kg 2. 0.7 CVT 58 hp FWD, 2016–2019 — 840 kg 3. 0.7 CVT 64 hp Turbo FWD, both generations — 850 kg 4. 0.7 CVT 58 hp AWD, 2013–2016 — 870 kg 5. 0.7 CVT 58 hp AWD, 2016–2019 — 890 kg 6. 0.7 CVT 64 hp Turbo AWD, 2013–2016 — 900 kg 7. 0.7 CVT 64 hp Turbo AWD, 2016–2019 — 920 kg
Spread from lightest to heaviest: 920 − 820 = 100 kg (12% of the lightest car). Tank is 30 L on all; that does not decide the version. Clearance is 150 mm except first-gen AWD at 170 mm.
Honda N-WGN vs N-Box, N-One, Move, Dayz, Mira, Wagon R
Those model-to-model searches cannot be scored here: this file has Honda N-WGN numbers only. Inside N-WGN, the decision is version-to-version, not brand-to-brand.
Performance and economy: what is measured
0–100 km/h, fastest to slowest:
- 14.2 s — 0.7 CVT 64 hp Turbo FWD, first generation
- 14.3 s — 0.7 CVT 64 hp Turbo FWD, restyling (0.1 s slower)
- 15.4 s — 0.7 CVT 64 hp Turbo AWD, first generation
- 16.7 s — 0.7 CVT 58 hp FWD, both generations
- 18.3 s — 0.7 CVT 58 hp AWD (both generations) and restyled 0.7 CVT 64 hp Turbo AWD
Top speed: not measured. City / highway / mixed consumption and mpg: not measured. CO2 is 89 on every version, so emissions figures do not separate trims. Fuel grade is 95 on all.
Which Honda N-WGN version to choose
1. Fastest Honda N-WGN in the catalogue: first-generation 0.7 CVT, 64 hp, Turbo, FWD — 14.2 s, 850 kg, 13.3 kg/hp. Restyled twin is 14.3 s at the same 850 kg; if you need a 2016–2019 car, that restyled FWD turbo is the right later car.
2. Lightest / simplest city car: first-generation 0.7 CVT, 58 hp, FWD — 820 kg, 16.7 s. Restyling of the same spec is 840 kg with the same 16.7 s; you pay 20 kg for the later build, not for more power.
3. AWD with extra clearance: first-generation 0.7 CVT AWD only — 170 mm. Choose 58 hp (870 kg, 18.3 s) if mass matters; 64 hp Turbo (900 kg, 15.4 s) if you want AWD and still beat NA FWD’s 16.7 s by 1.3 s.
4. Avoid if the goal is speed or lightness: restyled 0.7 CVT 64 hp Turbo AWD — 920 kg, 18.3 s, 150 mm. Versus first-gen Turbo AWD it is +20 kg and +2.9 s, and versus restyled Turbo FWD it is +70 kg and +4.0 s. Turbo on that row does not beat the 58 hp AWD 0–100 time.
5. Year filters (2014 / 2015 / 2016 / 2017 / 2019): 2014–May 2016 → first-generation table. June 2016–2019 → restyling table. Mid-2016 is the split, not a third generation.
6. “Custom” in search terms: this dataset does not name a separate Custom SKU. The turbo specification that people attach to Custom is the 64 hp Turbo 0.7 CVT. Treat that horsepower and boost label as the Custom-turbo proxy; do not invent a different version name.
7. What extra money cannot be shown to buy: there are no prices. You cannot compute cost per horsepower. You can only compute what the hardware change costs in kilograms and seconds, as above.
8. What nobody should pretend to choose on: oil litres, engine number, battery size, tyre/rim size, Pakistan price, mpg — all not measured.
Short rule: Turbo FWD 0.7 CVT for the sprint; NA FWD 0.7 CVT (preferably first generation) for the lowest mass; first-gen AWD 0.7 CVT only for AWD plus 170 mm; skip restyled Turbo AWD unless AWD on a 2016–2019 car is a hard requirement and 18.3 s / 920 kg are acceptable.