Toyota C-HR vs Renault Kadjar

What's the difference?

There’s not much in terms of practicalities that are going to convince you the C-HR is a better option than Toyota’s other small SUV, the Corolla Cross.

Even other ‘stylish’ small SUVs like the Mazda CX-30, fuel savers like the electric MG ZS EV, or performance small SUVs like the Hyundai Kona N are more affordable than the GR Sport version of the C-HR.

In the case of this car, unlike most of its Toyota stablemates, buyers will likely be making a decision from the heart based on exterior styling and its interior rather than value or practicality.

And who would anyone be to tell you not to buy a car you like for its styling?

The Renault Kadjar Intens ticks a lot of the urban boxes. It’s small, which is good for navigating narrow city streets and parking in tight spaces, but it’s also spacious and practical. The Kadjar is fuel efficient for a four-cylinder petrol engine and it has that sophisticated French styling.

The Intens is expensive, though, and unless you absolutely have to have leather seats, a glass roof, and the Bose stereo I’d go for the mid-range Zen grade and save yourself $5K but still have all the same safety tech. That said the Intens has auto parking as standard which is a nice convenience for the city.

Safety could be better. The AEB system doesn’t have pedestrian and cyclist detection, rear cross traffic alert, or reverse emergency braking.

Finally, the dual-clutch automatic and 1.3-litre turbo-petrol engine while a fuel efficient combination, isn’t all that easy to live with and can make driving a less-than-smooth experience. The Nissan Qashqai’s combination of CVT auto and four-cylinder naturally aspirated engine is better suited to the urban jungle - something to think about there. 

Now the scores, the Kadjar Intens gets the same mark for daily driving and its urban talents – it could be smoother to drive, but there’s still lots to like. 

There’s a fair bit going on here compared to most of Toyota’s other products, much like the first generation, but being designed with Europe as the key market and Australia as a secondary means the styling team needed to take on some fairly fashionable brands.

All three variants of the C-HR are relatively close in aesthetics, with major differences being two-tone paint or specific trim elements for the top-spec GR Sport.

It uses new Toyota design elements that have been seen on some models already, the ‘c-shape’ lights have been used on the new Prius, which we no longer get in Australia, for example.

The black roof was also available on the previous generation, where this car has carried over the ‘egg-like’ silhouette from.

The overall relatively aquatic styling and shape must be for aerodynamic advantage - its chief engineer told us the drag coefficient is just 0.318Cd - but the removal of the rear wiper to lower drag might have been unnecessary for a city-focused small SUV.

The cabin isn’t as wild as the outside, which may be a let-down in some ways, though it’s still a little more visually interesting than its more mainstream stablemates.

The 64-colour ambient lighting changes based on settings including time of day or drive mode, but can be set to a specific single colour if you wish.

The centre stack on the dash is gently angled towards the driver with a small separation between it and the passenger, creating a slight ‘cockpit’ feeling.

Seats are made from different materials depending on the grade, though no real leather is used even in the GR Sport, where synthetic suede and leather are the main upholstery.

The cloth textiles are made from entirely recycled materials, while the synthetic suede is made from a little less than half recycled materials.

They don’t look cheap, but they also don’t look particularly luxurious.

People talk about French design being good. Well if you want to see just how good take a look at the Nissan Qashqai, because the Kadjar is fundamentally the same SUV with Renault’s design spin applied.

Yep, as I mentioned about 15 seconds ago, Renault and Nissan are part of an alliance that allows them to share the same cars, but each brand has room to ‘make it their own’ with styling that delivers a very different look, inside and out.

Now, the Qashqai is not an ugly car, but I think the Kadjar is more stylish and premium looking in the same way the larger Renault Koleos SUV is gorgeous compared to the relatively straight-laced Nissan X-Trail it’s based on.

There’s no doubt the Kadjar is a Renault thanks to the giant diamond logo on the plunging grille. I like the way the front bumper rises up into the bonnet like it’s all one piece, but I’m not completely sold on the rear of the car which looks a bit like its shirt is tucked into the back of its pants, which makes no sense unless you look at the images.

Still, the tail-lights have a prestige feel and the Kadjar model name spelled out across the tailgate is a confident statement, also adopted recently by other brands such as Volkswagen (T-Cross) and Ford (Puma).  

Telling the Intens apart from the other two grades is fairly easy, it has 19-inch wheels (the others have 17-inch rims), there’s the enormous glass roof, and it also has a chrome effect on the front and rear bumpers, side skirts, and around the fog lights. It’s a more premium look.

That higher-end feel goes into the cabin as well with the Intens’ black leather upholstery and colourful ambient lighting. The touchscreen is tiny, though, and there isn’t a great deal inside that you don’t get in the entry-grade Kadjar’s cabin, which is also almost as stylish.

The Kadjar is classified as a small SUV, which means nothing really when it comes to wondering if it’s going to fit in your garage or in the tiny parking spaces we’re faced with in the city.

So, I’ve mapped it out for you. The Kadjar’s dimensions are, 4449mm long, 2058 mm across (including the wing mirrors), and 1612mm tall. 

Another interesting thing – each B-pillar is adorned with a little French flag. I’m not sure if they're a sign of Gallic national pride or to remind everybody that meets the Kadjar that Renaults are French.

Either way, you don’t see this type of thing on other cars and for many buyers the appeal of a Renault is having a car that’s not like everybody else’s.

When it comes to interior layout and ergonomics, there’s never much to criticise in a Toyota, unless playing it safe is a downside for you.

The buttons you’re most likely to use regularly, across the climate control, centre console and steering wheel, are all very obvious and easy to find, if a little uninspiring, as is wheel design itself - form definitely doesn’t sacrifice function here.

Welcome are the two large screens, the multimedia touchscreen a large 12.3-inch unit and the driver display either 7.0-inch or another 12.3-inch version depending on variant.

Toyota’s software is simple and accessible, using a few main menu sections, though many will likely bypass this with wireless phone mirroring.

Everything’s in a sensible place: a tall bottle in the cupholders won’t block access to anything, the phone charging pad is tucked away to minimise distraction, and Toyota has kept things like the gear selector and stalks behind the steering wheel relatively traditional.

While the interior feels a little dated by its many buttons and some of its simple graphics, there’s certainly something to be said for a welcome change from distracting screens and menus - if the aim was to not exclude Toyota’s older market, it seems like mission accomplished.

In terms of comfort and space, the C-HR makes pretty good use of its interior from the front, the seats are relatively comfortable and visibility is fine, though the back seat starts to feel a bit cramped.

While cupholders and door bottle storage is plentiful in the front, there’s no armrest and no bottle storage in the rear, only relatively shallow cupholders on the armrests in the doors.

Visibility is also relatively poor with high windows, a narrow rear window, and not a lot of light unless there’s a sunroof.

Behind that, with the seats up, the C-HR’s boot has a claimed VDA capacity of 388 litres in the GXL and Koba, or 362L in the GR Sport. Total volume with the seats down is 1154L and 1490L respectively.

The Kadjar is a big-small SUV, in that it’s longer than many in the same segment at 4.4m with a wheelbase of more than 2.6m, which means more space inside for people and their stuff.

That said, don’t expect limousine legroom, but at 191cm (6'3") tall, I can sit behind my driving position with my knees only just touching the front seat back, which is pretty darn good for a small SUV.

Making life a bit more comfortable back there, too, are directional air vents, two USB charging ports and a 12V power outlet. There are another two USB ports and a 12V up front, too.

Cabin storage is okay. The door pockets in the back are big enough for a 500ml bottle, while there are larger ones in the front, along with two cupholders and another circular hole, which looks like it’s for coins, if anybody still uses those?

The centre console bin is pretty decent in size and so too is the boot which has a cargo capacity of 408 litres with all seats up and 1478 litres with the second row folded flat.

The Intens is the highest grade of Kadjar you can buy and has a list price of $37,990. As a point of reference, the entry-grade Kadjar with an automatic transmission is $29,990. So, what are you getting for an extra $8K?

Well, the entry-level Kadjar comes with a 7.0-inch touchscreen with Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, cloth seats, dual-zone climate control, privacy glass and 17-inch alloy wheels. The Intens gets 19-inch alloys, leather seats (heated up front), a seven-speaker Bose sound system, leather steering wheel, panoramic sunroof, as well as LED headlights and fog lights.

The Intens also comes standard with auto parking, and even the most determined DIY parkers will appreciate that in the city.

The Intens also has more advanced safety equipment than the entry-grade, although the same tech also comes on the mid-spec Zen for $32,990.

You may already know this, but the Kadjar and the Nissan Qashqai are essentially the same car. Renault and Nissan have an alliance which lets them share technology and as well as entire models.

So, you might want to compare the Kadjar Intens to a Qashqai Ti which lists for $38,790. Other models to check are the Mitsubishi ASX and Toyota C-HR.

The difference in boot space is likely because the hybrid-only C-HR comes with two drivetrain options, depending on which variant you have.

The GXL and Koba both use Toyota’s 1.8-litre four-cylinder engine aided by a front-mounted electric motor to produce a 103kW output at the front wheels via a continuously variable transmission.

The GR Sport, however, gains a rear electric motor (taking up some boot space) and a more powerful front motor, helping a larger 2.0-litre four-cylinder petrol engine make a total 146kW - still via a CVT.

Don’t expect to be getting to 100km/h from a standstill in any less than 8.0 seconds in either variant, but both have a claimed top speed of 170km/h.

While the Renault Kadjar and Nissan Qashqai are essentially the same car, they don’t share the same powertrain. The Kadjar has a smaller but more powerful engine – a 1.3-litre turbo-petrol four-cylinder making 117kW/260Nm.

Shifting gears is a seven-speed dual-clutch auto. There’s no manual available, and all Kadjars are front-wheel drive.

Frankly, the Qashqai four cylinder with less grunt and CVT are a smoother combination. The dual-clutch auto and turbo lag means power delivery and acceleration are delayed, while low-speed gear shifts can be jerky.

Toyota says the C-HR uses just 4.0L/100km on the combined cycle test, which is 0.3L less than the previous generation’s claim, but it should be noted the 2.0-litre in the GR Sport drinks a claimed 4.1L/100km.

During testing on the launch drive, but without being able to measure properly from fill to fill, one quite spirited leg of driving netted a 6.9L/100km reading on the trip computer, while a more sedate drive returned 5.4L/100km.

Renault says after a combination of open and urban roads the Kadjar will have used 6.3L/100km. In my own testing I measured 6.5L/100km at the fuel pump. That’s outstanding.

There’s nothing particularly offensive about the way the new C-HR drives, but there’s nothing riveting either.

If you’ve driven anything on the Toyota TNGA platform, this will feel familiar to you - and that’s not a bad thing, it’s generally pretty stable, comfortable and controlled.

The modified Corolla platform it rides on is a very good thing, but the C-HR doesn’t have anything in the way of sporting tendencies its styling might suggest.

The hybrid drivetrain in the two 1.8-litre versions of the small SUV don’t offer up a whole lot in terms of keen acceleration, but even the GR Sport and its 146kW drivetrain need a push to get things feeling properly quick on a twisty road.

The added stability of the all-wheel drive in the top variant is noticeable, the front-drive variants feeling a little less planted when pushed.

Steering is on the slightly lighter side of still being well-weighted - it doesn’t wow, but Toyota’s engineers know what they’re doing and it does everything it needs to in terms of communicating feeling to the driver.

Some particularly rough roads on the test drive showed the suspension to handle short, sharp bumps well and not feel crashy over larger imperfections.

The suspension has been retuned in this TNGA-C platform to be stiffer for more control but also more compliant in terms of comfort.

But it’s around urban and suburban streets where the C-HR will spend most of its time, and neglected streets, speed bumps, or tram lines won’t shake you too much from in the cabin.

Renault’s Kadjar may be a better-looking version of Nissan’s Qashqai, but it doesn’t drive as well. This comes down to the engine and transmission Renault has gone with.

There’s turbo lag with that small four-cylinder and this delay is made more pronounced by a dual-clutch transmission that causes the vehicle to lurch during shifts.

This type of shemozzle is not uncommon, the Ford Puma and Nissan Juke behave in the same way with their similar powertrains.

There’s nothing wrong with them, it’s just that for a car that’s probably going to spend its life mainly in the city, the Kadjar won’t provide the smoothest driving experience.

The Qashqai has a CVT automatic and while these transmission aren’t as sporty feeling as a dual-clutch, they’re smooth and good for easy city driving.

The Kadjar does have a comfortable ride and good handling, so if you’re able to get used to the antics of the engine and transmission there’s more to like than not about the way this Renault drives.

The Kadjar hasn’t been given an ANCAP safety rating, but it did score the maximum five stars when tested by its European equivalent Euro NCAP in 2015.

But beware, the Kadjar isn’t equipped with much in the way of advanced safety equipment. Yes, there is AEB on all grades, while the mid-spec Zen and top-of-the-range Intens come with blind spot monitoring and lane departure warning. But that’s about it. No lane keeping assist, or rear cross traffic alert, or adaptive cruise.

There are front and rear parking sensors, which are almost vital in the city, and a reversing camera.

It’s for this reason the score here is so low – charging $38K and not having anywhere near the level of safety tech on a new car that costs much less is disappointing.

For child seats there are three top tether anchor points across the second row and two ISOFIX points.

Under the boot floor is a space saver spare wheel.

Toyota has a five-year/unlimited-kilometre warranty which covers the C-HR, as well as capped-price servicing for the first five years or 75,000km, whichever comes first, with each 12-month/15,000km service costing $250.

The C-HR also comes with a 12-month subscription to Toyota Connected Services, with features accessible through the myToyota Connect smartphone app.

The Kadjar is covered by Renault’s five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty.

Service intervals are every 12 months or 30,000km and capped at $399 for the first three services, followed by $789 for the fourth then back to $399.

There’s also up to five years roadside assistance, if you service your Kadjar with Renault.