As the crossover segment becomes increasingly crowded, there’s less and less elbow room to distinguish yourself on the value front.
Clearly, Honda would like the HR-V’s spacious interior to be taken into account when buyers are doing the maths, because the four-trim line-up starts at a significantly higher price than some of the alternatives we’ve summed up as smaller – the Peugeot 2008, Renault Captur and so on.
The Mazda CX-3 and Skoda Yeti are closer to the £18k you’d pay for an HR-V in S trim and the Nissan Qashqai is just beyond it. The £22k needed for our SE Navi test car, which adds Garmin sat-nav to the SE’s decent kit list – dual-zone climate, 17in wheels, parking sensors, 7.0in touchscreen, auto lights and wipers, Bluetooth, DAB and so on – will not buy you quite as much Nissan.
There is similarly little daylight in running costs, too. True MPG testing suggests that the 68.9mpg official claim is optimistic, but shortening it to a real-world 55.7mpg puts the HR-V in a very similar place to the equivalent CX-3 and Qashqai we’ve tested.
You can have the Nissan in sub-100g/km CO2 format, although we wouldn’t recommend it for the performance shortfall. For its 108g/km, the Honda is a lot worthier.
As, for the moment, are the early residuals, which suggest the HR-V is likely to retain close to half its value three years out, giving it a healthy advantage over the Qashqai.