HR-V DX vs 300 Challenger 2.0T Comparison
Car Information
Engine / Motor
4
4
1498cc
1998 cc
/
200 km/h
/
Chinese
Dimensions
5
5 Seater
/
5 Doors
/
4760 mm
/
1930 mm
/
1927 mm
/
2750 mm
/
400 L
/
224 m
Fuel Economy
40
75 L
/
10 Km/L
/
10 Km/L
Comfort
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Keyless Entry
/
✓
Interior
4.2
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Front Row Seats
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Leather
/
Digital
/
Dual Zone
/
✓
/
Electric
/
✓
/
Standard
Safety
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
4
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Infotainment
8
12.3
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
Android LCD
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
4
9
/
✓
Transmission
Automatic
Automatic
Chassis & Steering
Front Drive
Four Wheel Drive
Wheels/brakes
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Key Spec
1.5 L - 1.8 L
2.0 L
119 - 140 BHP
223 BHP - 342 BHP
Automatic & CVT
Automatic
Gasoline & Petrol
Gasoline & Hybrid
TBD
TBD
5 - 5
5 Seater
Exterior
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
/
✓
/
LED
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Engine
In-Line
In-Line
1.5
2.0 L
Gasoline
Gasoline
Naturally Aspirated
/
1.5L i-VTEC
/
4
4
10.6:1
/
DOHC IN VTC+IN-VTEC
/
119
224 BHP
87.7
/
6600
/
145
387 Nm
4300
/
i-VTEC
/
PGM-FI 电喷
/
/
Single Turbo
Technologies
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
/
✓
Comparison of configuration highlights
HR-V DX
- Audio Controls on Steering Wheel
- Electronic Engine Immobilizer
- Rear Defogger
- Push Button Start
- Temperature Display
- Keyless Entry
- Welcome Light
- Seats - Comfort
- Rear Power Outlet
- Keyless Start
- Rear Camera
- Headlight On Reminder
- Emergency Lane Keeping (ELK）
- Front Cross Traffic Alert
- Rear Cross Traffic Alert
- Anti-Theft Alarm System
- Number of Airbags
- Lane Following Assist
- Rear Crumple Zone
- Front Crumple Zone
- Intelligent Emergency Call
- Front and Rear Crumple Zone
- Rollover stability control
- Runflat Tyres
- Tire Repair Kit
- Security System
- Pedestrian airbag
- Crosswind Assist
- Active Understeer Control (AUC)
- Active Bonnet
- Acceleration Skid Control
- Collision Detection
- Blind Spot Warning
- Knee Bag - Driver
- Speed Limiter
- Crash Auto Door Unlock
- Auto Door Lock
- Spare Wheel
- Door Mirrors with Side Turn Signal
- Vehicle Stability Control (VSC)
- Seatbelt pretensioner
- EBD (Electronic Brakeforce Distribution)
- Speed Sensing Auto Door Lock
- Driver Seat Belt Warning
- ABS
- EBD/CBC
- EBA/BA
- Traction Control System (TCS / ASR, etc.)
- Vehicle Stability System (ESP/DSC, etc.)
- Active Safety Warning System
- Passive Pedestrian Protection
- Child Seat Interface (ISOFIX)
- Child Lock
- Speed Alert
- Active braking
- Lane Departure Warning
- Lane Keeping Assist
- Seat belt reminder
300 Challenger 2.0T
- Electronic engine immobilizer
- 360 Degree camera
- Rear Defogger
- Rear Power Outlet
- Heated Side Mirrors
- Parking sensor rear
- Parking sensor front
- Keyless Start
- Heater
- Rear Camera
- Headlight On Reminder
- Remote key types
- Steering Adjustment
- Anti-Theft Alarm System
- Speed Sensing Auto Door Lock
- Driver Seat Belt Warning
- ABS
- EBD/CBC
- EBA/BA
- Passive Pedestrian Protection
- Child Lock
- Speed Alert
- Active braking
Review Comparison
Positive
- Flexible interior design and practical space
- Fuel efficiency and economical maintenance
- Driving comfort and good wheelbase adjustment
Negative
- Insufficient engine performance in some cases
- The quality of interior materials needs to be improved
- Standard equipment is limited in basic categories
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Related comparisons
Expert / Editor Recommendation
Choose HR-V DX if you care more about price; choose 300 Challenger 2.0T if you care more about power.
Popular Car Comparisons
Q&A
- According to fuel consumption data, HR-V DX has a fuel consumption of 5.35, while 300 Challenger 2.0T has a fuel consumption of 10. Therefore, HR-V DX is more fuel-efficient.
- In terms of interior space, HR-V DX has a wheelbase of No data, while 300 Challenger 2.0T has a wheelbase of 2750 mm. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, No data, offers more room.
- Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. HR-V DX uses Front Drive, while 300 Challenger 2.0T uses Four Wheel Drive.