Chevrolet Captiva 2013 vs Subaru Forester 2013
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 184 HP | 147 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Chevrolet Captiva is more dynamic to drive. Chevrolet Captiva engine produces 37 HP more power than Subaru Forester, whereas torque is 50 NM more than Subaru Forester. Thanks to more power Chevrolet Captiva reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 5.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.3 l/100km | 6.8 l/100km | |
|
The Subaru Forester is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chevrolet Captiva consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Subaru Forester, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chevrolet Captiva could require 105 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chevrolet Captiva consumes 2.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Subaru Forester. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1010 km in combined cycle | 1050 km in combined cycle | |
| 1160 km on highway | 1220 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 880 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 350'000 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: | 14 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Opel Antara | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Subaru Outback, Subaru Legacy | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Subaru Forester might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Chevrolet Captiva engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.67 m | 4.60 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.76 m | 1.74 m | |
|
Chevrolet Captiva is larger. Chevrolet Captiva is 8 cm longer than the Subaru Forester, 5 cm wider, while the height of Chevrolet Captiva is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | no data | |
| Trunk capacity: | 97 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 97 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 477 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1577 litres | no data | |
| In 5-seat version Subaru Forester has more luggage space (by 28 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.3 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Captiva is 1.7 metres more than that of the Subaru Forester, which means Chevrolet Captiva can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`505 | 2`080 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | average | |
| Subaru Forester has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chevrolet Captiva has serious deffects in 70 percent more cases than Subaru Forester, so Subaru Forester quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8400 | 17 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Captiva has
|
Subaru Forester has
| |