BMW X5 2003 vs Chevrolet Captiva 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 500 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.8 seconds | 12.2 seconds | |
|
BMW X5 is more dynamic to drive. BMW X5 engine produces 68 HP more power than Chevrolet Captiva, whereas torque is 180 NM more than Chevrolet Captiva. Thanks to more power BMW X5 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 | 8.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.5 l/100km | 10.1 l/100km | |
|
The Chevrolet Captiva is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW X5 consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Captiva, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW X5 could require 105 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW X5 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Captiva. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 93 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 980 km in combined cycle | 740 km in combined cycle | |
| 1160 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| 880 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 180 mm (7.1 inches) | 200 mm (7.9 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Chevrolet Captiva can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 530'000 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: | 3 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW X3 | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Opel Antara, Chevrolet Epica, Chevrolet Cruze | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| BMW X5 2003 3.0 engine: The BMW M57 engine is regarded as one of the best German-built power units. Its inline-six layout is praised for reliability, and cars equipped with this engine are often more desirable on the used market. Despite delivering ... More about BMW X5 2003 3.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.67 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.87 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.72 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. BMW X5 is 3 cm longer than the Chevrolet Captiva, 2 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Seats: | 5 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 465 litres | 465 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 465 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 465 litres | 465 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1550 litres | 930 litres | |
| The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in BMW X5 (by 620 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 11.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW X5 is 0.5 metres more than that of the Chevrolet Captiva, which means BMW X5 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`695 | 2`505 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | low | |
| BMW X5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chevrolet Captiva has serious deffects in 65 percent more cases than BMW X5, so BMW X5 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5000 | 4600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW X5 has
|
Chevrolet Captiva has
| |