What are the differences between Toyota Izoa and CHR?

[LeElla]

Toyota CHR belongs to GAC Toyota, while Izoa belongs to FAW Toyota. The knowledge about Toyota Izoa and CHR is as follows: The differences between Toyota Izoa and CHR: The lower grille of Izoa adopts a simple horizontal bar style paired with a silver lower guard plate decoration; while the CHR's lower grille features a more sporty honeycomb grille. The engines of Toyota Izoa and CHR: Both use a 2.0L naturally aspirated engine designed for the TNGA architecture series, with a four-cylinder structure. The maximum power output can reach 171 horsepower, with a maximum torque of 203 Nm. The maximum torque speed is 4400-4800 rpm, and the maximum power speed is 6600 rpm.

[DeZane]

I'm considering buying an SUV and comparing the differences between the Izoa and C-HR. The Izoa has a more aggressive exterior with sharp headlights that suit younger drivers, and it's agile for city driving and easy to park. The C-HR features a rounded, globally-inspired design, offering better stability in corners and more comfort at high speeds. After testing the rear seats, I found the C-HR has slightly more legroom, while both have sufficient trunk space for daily use. The C-HR uses more soft-touch materials, giving it a more premium feel, whereas the Izoa has more hard plastics but is practical. Price-wise, the Izoa is about 10,000 RMB cheaper and comes standard with LED lights and air conditioning; the C-HR offers more tech features like wireless charging and navigation. The Izoa is slightly more fuel-efficient, but maintenance costs are similar. Overall, if you're on a tight budget, the Izoa offers better value for money, while the C-HR is the choice for those seeking a more refined experience.

[BrookeMarie]

Having driven both cars, they both use Toyota's 1.5L turbo engine with around 170 horsepower and quick response. The IZOA feels more direct in throttle response, making it suitable for city driving, while the C-HR is tuned more linearly for less fatigue on long trips. In terms of transmission, the C-HR's CVT is smoother, whereas the IZOA's dual-clutch offers sharper reactions but slightly sluggish starts. The suspension differs significantly: the C-HR's independent setup provides better vibration absorption, while the IZOA's torsion beam feels stiffer on rough roads. Both come with automatic braking and rearview cameras, but the C-HR adds lane-keeping assist. The IZOA is slightly more fuel-efficient due to lower drag, averaging about 7L/100km in the city versus the C-HR's near 8L. Noise control is better in the C-HR thanks to superior sealing. Maintenance costs are similar, though C-HR parts might be slightly pricier. Overall, the C-HR offers a more stable and comprehensive driving experience, ideal for families or experienced drivers.

[SanPenelope]

These two compact SUVs have similar space. I find the front seats comfortable, but the C-HR offers more generous rear legroom without feeling cramped. The cargo capacity is 400 liters for the IZOA and 420 liters for the C-HR, a minor difference that suffices for daily shopping. The C-HR's interior features premium leather and tactile upgrades, while the IZOA's minimalist design is stain-resistant and easy to maintain. The C-HR's seats provide better comfort for long trips, whereas the IZOA offers stronger support. In terms of driving, the IZOA is lighter, more agile, and easier to handle, while the C-HR is smoother and quieter but has a larger turning radius, making parking more challenging. Fuel consumption is nearly identical, averaging 8-9L in urban areas. The IZOA is more affordable with greater discounts, whereas the C-HR's higher trim is pricier but holds its value better. Overall, young buyers may prefer the IZOA for its cost-effectiveness and trendy appeal, while families might opt for the C-HR for its comfort and safety.