BMW X3 2014 vs Chevrolet Captiva 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 190 HP | 184 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.1 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
|
BMW X3 is more dynamic to drive. BMW X3 engine produces 6 HP more power than Chevrolet Captiva, the torque is the same for both cars. Thanks to more power BMW X3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.2 | 6.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 9.3 l/100km | |
|
The BMW X3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW X3 consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Captiva, which means that by driving the BMW X3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 180 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW X3 consumes 1.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Captiva. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 67 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1280 km in combined cycle | 1010 km in combined cycle | |
| 1340 km on highway | 1160 km on highway | ||
| 880 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 204 mm (8 inches) | 200 mm (7.9 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 330'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Chevrolet Captiva engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 1 sērija, BMW 2 sērija | Used also on Opel Antara | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.66 m | 4.67 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.66 m | 1.76 m | |
| BMW X3 is 2 cm shorter than the Chevrolet Captiva, 3 cm wider, while the height of BMW X3 is 10 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 97 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 97 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 550 litres | 477 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1600 litres | 1577 litres | |
| In 5-seat version BMW X3 has more luggage space (by 73 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in BMW X3 (by 23 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 12.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW X3 is 0.4 metres less than that of the Chevrolet Captiva, which means BMW X3 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Electric power steering | Hydraulic power steering | |
| Electric power steering is simpler, quieter, more fuel-efficient, more configurable and provides additional features such as auto-steering for lane assist and parking. The disadvantages of electric power steering are possible overheating under prolonged load conditions and insufficient feedback (feeling) during steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`365 | 2`505 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | low | |
| BMW X3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chevrolet Captiva has serious deffects in 170 percent more cases than BMW X3, so BMW X3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 20 800 | 8400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW X3 has
|
Chevrolet Captiva has
| |