Chevrolet Captiva 2006 vs Chevrolet Orlando 2011
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Body: | Crossover / SUV | Minivan / MPV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Chevrolet Captiva is available with front wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive, while Chevrolet Orlando can be equipped only with front wheel drive. | |||
| Engines: | 2.0 - 3.2 | 1.4 - 2.0 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 127 - 230 HP | 130 - 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 - 320 NM | 176 - 360 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.8 - 12.2 seconds | 10 - 11.6 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 - 11.5 | 6.0 - 7.9 | |
|
Chevrolet Captiva petrol engines consumes on average 2.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than Chevrolet Orlando. On average, Chevrolet Captiva equipped with diesel engines consume 1.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Orlando. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.64 m | 4.65 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.63 m | |
|
Chevrolet Captiva is smaller, but higher. Chevrolet Captiva is 1 cm shorter than the Chevrolet Orlando, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Chevrolet Captiva is 9 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 465 litres | 458 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
930 litres | 1499 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Chevrolet Captiva has 7 litres more trunk space than the Chevrolet Orlando. The Chevrolet Orlando may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Chevrolet Orlando (by 569 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.1 meters | 11.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Captiva is 0.8 metres more than that of the Chevrolet Orlando, which means Chevrolet Captiva can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`454 | ~ 2`228 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 4400 | 6000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Captiva has
|
Chevrolet Orlando has
| |