Honda CR-V vs Rolls-Royce Phantom

A proper head-to-head in South Africa — compare price, performance, fuel economy or electric range, safety and the details that shape long-term ownership.

Honda CR-V in South Africa

Honda CR-V

2.0 Hybrid e:HEV Hybrid e-CVT Current
ZAR 819,900 ex-showroom
⚡ 204 kW 🔧 335 Nm ⛽ 20 km/l
VS
Rolls-Royce Phantom in South Africa

Rolls-Royce Phantom

Phantom Series II Petrol 8-Speed Automatic Current
Price on request
⚡ 420 kW 🔧 900 Nm ⛽ 6.29 km/l
+ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Honda CR-V vs Rolls-Royce Phantom: the short answer

CR-V and Phantom are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification CR-V Phantom
Maximum Power CR-V204 kW Phantom420 kW @ 5000 rpm
Maximum Torque CR-V335 Nm Phantom900 Nm @ 1700 rpm
Engine Size CR-V1993 cc Phantom6749 cc
Combined Fuel Economy CR-V20 km/l Phantom6.29 km/l
Ground Clearance CR-V198 mm Phantom136 mm

Strongest published figure in that row; no road-test winner is implied.

Independent editorial assessment

Hagalu editorial ratings

When a variant is selected, its rating out of five applies only to that exact derivative; a model-range review is not inherited. Editorial ratings are separate from the Specification Evidence Index out of 100 and are not customer ratings.

Honda CR-V

2.0 Hybrid e:HEV

Hagalu editorial rating Not yet rated

No complete editorial rating is published for this exact variant. This is not a zero score.

How Hagalu rates cars

Rolls-Royce Phantom

Phantom Series II

Hagalu editorial rating Not yet rated

No complete editorial rating is published for this exact variant. This is not a zero score.

How Hagalu rates cars

Not yet rated means a complete review is not published; it does not mean the vehicle scored zero. Read the rating methodology.

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

Specification evidence leader

CR-V

Strengths
  • Better fuel efficiency
Weak Spots
  • Less powerful engine setup
  • Fewer listed safety features
  • Lower published practicality figures
Best suited to: Published Efficiency

Phantom

Strengths
  • More powerful engine output
  • Stronger listed safety equipment
  • Stronger published practicality figures
Weak Spots
  • Lower fuel efficiency
Best suited to: Published Performance Published Practicality

Which One's Right for You?

CR-V

  • Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use

Phantom

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures
  • Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment
  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures

Full Specs, Side by Side

Spec CR-V Phantom
Wheelbase 2700 mm 3552 mm
Length 4690 mm 5762 mm
Width 1860 mm 2018 mm
Height 1690 mm 1646 mm
Kerb Weight 1750 kg 2560 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 2250 kg 3235 kg
Seating Capacity 5 seats 5 seats
Boot/Cargo Space 497 l 530 l
Towing Capacity 1500 kg 0 kg
Fuel Tank Capacity 57 l 90 l
Doors 5 doors 4 doors
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) 198 mm 136 mm
Payload Capacity 500 kg 675 kg
Number of Rows 2 rows 2 rows
Minimum Turning Radius 5.7 m 6.55 m
Front Headroom 970 mm 1046 mm
Rear Headroom 970 mm 978 mm
Front Legroom 1049 mm 1041 mm
Rear Legroom 1041 mm 1105 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 198 mm 136 mm
Spec CR-V Phantom
Gearbox eCVT Automatic 8-speed ZF automatic
Drivetrain Layout All Wheel Drive Front-engine, rear-wheel drive with all-wheel steering
LSD Available Electronic AWD Control -
Transfer Case Not Applicable Not Applicable
Transmission Type Automatic 8-speed ZF automatic
Gearbox Type eCVT Automatic 8-speed ZF automatic
Gear Shift Type eCVT Automatic Satellite Aided automatic gear selection
Drivetrain AWD Rear-wheel drive
Axle Layout AWD Rear-wheel-drive power delivery with active rear-axle steering
Differential Lock Electronic AWD Lock No lockable differential
4WD Engagement Available Not Applicable
4WD Hi Range Available Not Applicable
Low Range Ratio Not Applicable Not Applicable
Number of Gears Not Applicable 8
Transmission Speeds Not Applicable 8
4WD Lo Range Not Applicable Not Applicable
4WD Selector Not Applicable Not Applicable
Low Range Not Applicable Not Applicable
Front Differential Lock Not Applicable Not Applicable
Rear Differential Lock Not Applicable No lockable differential
Paddle Shifters Not Applicable No
Automatic Shift Paddles Not Applicable No
Final Drive Ratio Not Applicable 2.81:1
Clutch Type Not Applicable Torque converter
Gear Shift Indicator Not Applicable -

In depth: how these cars differ

This CR-V and Phantom comparison uses the exact derivatives selected above for South Africa. The catalogue index covers performance, efficiency, safety equipment, practicality and ownership cover only where comparable source-backed fields are present.

Performance index: CR-V 77 vs Phantom 96.

Efficiency index: CR-V 80 vs Phantom 29.

Safety-equipment index: CR-V 91 vs Phantom 95.

Practicality index: CR-V 66 vs Phantom 67.

Ownership-cover index: CR-V 60 vs Phantom not separately scored.

These figures are Hagalu catalogue-comparison indicators, not customer ratings, crash-test scores, resale guarantees or a substitute for a road test. Each page shows its weighted source coverage beside the result.

Specification Evidence Index

A transparent comparison of published catalogue fields. This is not a road-test score, owner rating or editorial review rating, and it appears only when every vehicle clears the same comparable-data threshold.

Evidence / 100
Evidence-index readout

CR-V leads by 1 points

CR-V and Phantom are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.

Evidence leader 76 /100
Lead 1 points
Data 94% source coverage
76
#1 Evidence leader

CR-V

94% source coverage 3 strong categories
Best at Safety 91 Check Ownership 60
Performance 77
Efficiency 80
Safety 91
Practicality 66
Ownership 60
Leads by 1 points
75
#2

Phantom

79% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Performance 96 Check Efficiency 29
Performance 96
Efficiency 29
Safety 95
Practicality 67
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance Phantom +19 Efficiency CR-V +51 Safety Phantom +4 Practicality Phantom +1

Close catalogue match. Buyer priorities should decide the outcome.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

CR-V

Performance 77/100
Efficiency 80/100
Safety 91/100
Practicality 66/100
Ownership 60/100

Phantom

Performance 96/100
Efficiency 29/100
Safety 95/100
Practicality 67/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Honda CR-V leads the specification evidence index with 76 pts vs 75 pts for Phantom

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, CR-V leads. However, Phantom may suit buyers prioritising different confirmed fields. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in South Africa.

CR-V vs Phantom questions

There is no universal winner. Use the comparison table to match the models and available derivatives in South Africa on price, safety equipment, space, powertrain and ownership cover. The category indicators summarise published catalogue data; they are not a road test or customer rating.

Compare the published consumption or mileage rows for the exact derivatives using the same unit and test basis. A catalogue figure is useful for like-for-like comparison, but traffic, speed, load, weather and driving style can change actual fuel use.

Compare only equipment explicitly listed for each derivative, including airbags, stability control and driver-assistance systems. Confirm the exact trim with the manufacturer, and treat any independent crash-test result separately because equipment and ratings can differ by market.

A reliable five-year total cannot be calculated from catalogue data alone. Add the exact purchase and finance cost, fuel or electricity, insurance quotes, scheduled servicing, tyres and expected resale value. Check whether the selected derivative includes a service or maintenance plan.

Use the seating, boot or load-space, ISOFIX and safety rows as a first check. Then test the exact cars with your child seats, passengers and typical luggage, because published dimensions do not show every access or comfort difference.

Compare the published power, torque and 0–100 km/h rows when they are available for both exact derivatives. Vehicle weight, gearing and power delivery also matter, so catalogue outputs alone do not establish real-world overtaking or response.