Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron vs Toyota C-HR+
Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron leads 6 to 1
Biggest differences: Power — Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron 286 PS, Toyota C-HR+ 224 PS · Boot — Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron 527 l, Toyota C-HR+ 416 l · Top speed — Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron 180 km/h, Toyota C-HR+ 160 km/h.
Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron
Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron is a C-segment coupe SUV, in model year 2027 in four variants: WLTP range from 451 to 576 km, power from 204 to 340 hp.
Toyota C-HR+
Toyota C-HR+ is a C-segment crossover in three variants: WLTP range from 458 to 606 km, power from 167 to 343 hp.
Profile against the market: Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron vs Toyota C-HR+
Audi Q4 Sportback e-trone-tron performance
Toyota C-HR+77 kWh
Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron or Toyota C-HR+ — who wins where
Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron leads 6 to 1
The score leaves out metrics where data is missing on one side.
Click a slice to see only those metrics. Each bar shows where the car stands against the whole catalogue.
- WLTP range kmToyota C-HR+ +30 km
- Battery kWhAudi Q4 Sportback e-tron +5 kWh
- Consumption ↓ kWh/100 kmNo difference
- Power PSAudi Q4 Sportback e-tron +62 PS
- 0–100 km/h ↓ sAudi Q4 Sportback e-tron −0.8 s
- Top speed km/hAudi Q4 Sportback e-tron +20 km/h
- DC charging kWAudi Q4 Sportback e-tron +15 kW
- AC charging kWNo difference
- Charging ↓ minNo data
- Weight ↓ kgNo data
- Boot lAudi Q4 Sportback e-tron +111 l
Technical data: Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron vs Toyota C-HR+
Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data
| Key parameters | Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron e-tron performance | Toyota C-HR+ 77 kWh | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range and energy | |||
| WLTP range | 576 km | 606 km | Toyota +30 km |
| Battery | 77 kWh | 72 kWh | Audi +5 kWh |
| Consumption ↓ | 13.4 kWh/100 km | 13.4 kWh/100 km | No difference |
| Charging | |||
| DC charging | 165 kW | 150 kW | Audi +15 kW |
| AC charging | 11 kW | 11 kW | No difference |
| Charging 10–80% ↓ | — | 28 min | — |
| Range per minute of charging | — | 15.2 km/min | — |
| Voltage | — | 400 V | — |
| Performance and drivetrain | |||
| Power | 286 PS | 224 PS | Audi +62 PS |
| 0–100 km/h ↓ | 6.6 s | 7.4 s | Audi −0.8 s |
| Top speed | 180 km/h | 160 km/h | Audi +20 km/h |
| Drivetrain | RWD | FWD | different type |
| Practicality | |||
| Weight ↓ | — | 1890 kg | — |
| Boot | 527 l | 416 l | Audi +111 l |
| V2L (external power) | No | Yes | only Toyota |
| Length | — | 4520 mm | — |
| Width | — | 1870 mm | — |
| Height | — | 1595 mm | — |
| Wheelbase | — | 2750 mm | — |
The better value in each row is bold and underlined in the colour of the car. Metrics marked ↓ — lower is better. Dimensions are shown without picking a winner.
Energy cost calculator
Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron
Toyota C-HR+
Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.
Video reviews of both models
Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron
Toyota C-HR+
Other comparisons in this class: SUV / Crossover, segment C
Frequently asked questions about this comparison
Which has the longer range — Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron or Toyota C-HR+?
The Toyota C-HR+ goes further: 606 km WLTP against the 576 km of the Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron. That is a difference of 30 km.
Why does the Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron have a bigger battery but a shorter range than the Toyota C-HR+?
The Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron carries 77 kWh and covers 576 km, while the Toyota C-HR+ with its 72 kWh battery does 606 km. Energy use decides it: 13.4 against 13.4 kWh/100 km.
How do the drivetrains of the Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron and the Toyota C-HR+ differ?
The Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron has RWD and 286 PS. The Toyota C-HR+ has FWD and 224 PS.
Which one can power appliances from a socket (V2L)?
Only the Toyota C-HR+ — its 72 kWh battery then works as a power source. The Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron, with 77 kWh, does not offer it.
Technical data comes from official manufacturer materials and we do our best to verify it, but a manufacturer can change a specification without notice and mistakes do happen. Confirm the figures with a dealer before you buy — we accept no liability for decisions made on the basis of this data. Full disclaimer
Range, consumption and weight are given for the base configuration: manufacturers homologate them as a band of values that depends on wheels and equipment (e.g. 533–592 km), and we take the lightest variant, on the smallest wheels — i.e. the most favourable. The same model on larger wheels will travel a shorter distance.