Denza Z9 GT vs Denza Z9 GT vs Honda CR-V vs Chevrolet Silverado 1500
Denza Z9 GT
$49,970
Denza Z9 GT
$85,000
Honda CR-V
$37,899 – $38,650
Chevrolet Silverado 1500
$53,599 – $54,800
AI Comparison Summary
Comparing Denza Z9 GT vs Denza Z9 GT vs Honda CR-V vs Chevrolet Silverado 1500. Honda CR-V offers the strongest value on price. Denza Z9 GT leads on expert rating.
Category Winners
Overall Winner
Denza Z9 GT
Best Value
Honda CR-V
Fuel Economy
Honda CR-V
Performance
Chevrolet Silverado 1500
Visual Comparison
Category Radar
Price & Reviews
Model Year
Expert Rating
Denza Z9 GT
$49,970
Rating: 4.8/10
Denza Z9 GT
$85,000
Rating: 4.8/10
Honda CR-V
$37,899 – $38,650
Rating: 4.7/10
Chevrolet Silverado 1500
$53,599 – $54,800
Rating: 4.5/10
| Specification |
Denza Z9 GT |
Denza Z9 GT |
Honda CR-V |
Chevrolet Silverado 1500 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brand | Denza | Denza | Honda | Chevrolet |
| Model | Z9 GT | Z9 GT | CR-V | Silverado 1500 |
| Year | 2026 | 2025 | 2026 | 2026 |
| Type | Ev | Ev | Suv | — |
| Body Style | Shooting Brake | Luxury Grand Tourer Hatchback / Wagon | Compact Crossover SUV | Full-Size Pickup Truck |
| Current Price | $49,970 | $85,000 | $37,899 – $38,650 | $53,599 – $54,800 |
| MSRP | $49,970 | $85,000 | $38,650 | $54,800 |
| Dealer Price | $48,500 | $83,000 | $37,299 | $52,499 |
| Engine | Tri-Motor Permanent Magnet Synchronous AWD | Tri-Motor Electric AWD System (1 front, 2 rear) | 1.5L Turbo Inline-4 | 5.3L EcoTec3 V8 |
| Horsepower | 952 hp (710 kW) | approx. 952 hp (710 kW) | 190 hp | 355 hp |
| Torque | 1150 Nm | High-output torque vectoring | 179 lb-ft | 383 lb-ft |
| 0–60 mph | 2.7 - 3.4 sec (0-100 km/h) | Under 3.5 seconds (0-100 km/h / 0-62 mph) | Approx. 8.0 sec (0-60 mph) | Approx. 6.1 sec (0-60 mph) |
| Top Speed | 240 km/h | 240 km/h (149 mph) | Approx. 116 mph | Approx. 112 mph |
| Fuel Type | Electric | Electric | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Mileage / MPG | 18.3 kWh/100km efficiency | N/A - Fully Electric | 29 MPG combined | 18 MPG combined (EPA est., configuration dependent) |
| Range (EV) | 630 km - 820 km CLTC | Over 600+ km (CLTC standard) | N/A | N/A |
| Emissions | 0 g/mi | 0 g/mi | Meets applicable U.S. federal and state standards | Meets applicable U.S. federal and state standards |
| Battery | 100 kWh | High-capacity Blade Battery pack | N/A | N/A |
| Charging | Ultra-fast FLASH charging (9 min full charge capability) | High-power DC Fast Charge capable | N/A | N/A |
| Expert Rating | 4.8/10 | 4.8/10 | 4.7/10 | 4.5/10 |
| Community Reviews | 0 | 0 | 1340 | 870 |
| Performance Score | 9.8 | 9.6 | 8.2 | 8.8 |
| Comfort Score | 9.5 | 9.3 | 9.2 | 8.6 |
| Safety Score | High-Speed Blowout Stability & Low-Adhesion Stabilization | Comprehensive active collision avoidance and stability control | 9.4 | 8.9 |
| Fuel Economy Score | 9.2 | 9.0 | 9.0 | 7.9 |
| Technology Score | 9.7 | 9.5 | 8.8 | 9.0 |
| Value Score | 9.3 | 9.1 | 9.0 | 8.7 |
| Pros | Explosive tri-motor acceleration (0-100 km/h in 2.7 - 3.4 seconds); Next-generation Blade Battery 2.0 with ultra-fast ch... | Staggering tri-motor powertrain output (~952 horsepower); Independent rear-wheel steering and crab-walk capabilities; Lu... | Spacious and practical cabin design; Strong standard and available safety tech; Comfortable ride and quiet interior; Com... | Strong maximum towing capability; Broad engine and trim lineup; Useful trailer and bed technologies; Large infotainment... |
| Cons | Large footprint can feel wide in tight urban parking; High curb weight typical of high-capacity tri-motor EVs; Limited g... | Large footprint can feel wide in compact urban settings; High-performance configurations carry premium positioning | Acceleration is adequate rather than sporty; Higher trims increase total cost quickly; No dedicated performance-oriented... | Ride quality can feel firm on rough surfaces; Fuel economy is average for the segment; Some advanced features locked to... |
