Chevrolet Captiva 2013 vs Honda CR-V 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
| Chevrolet Captiva engine produces 13 HP more power than Honda CR-V, the torque is the same for both cars. Despite the higher power, Chevrolet Captiva reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 5.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.7 l/100km | 6.8 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chevrolet Captiva consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chevrolet Captiva could require 120 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chevrolet Captiva consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1010 km in combined cycle | 1030 km in combined cycle | |
| 1160 km on highway | 1130 km on highway | ||
| 840 km with real consumption | 850 km with real consumption | ||
| 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) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.67 m | 4.53 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.76 m | 1.65 m | |
|
Chevrolet Captiva is larger. Chevrolet Captiva is 14 cm longer than the Honda CR-V, 3 cm wider, while the height of Chevrolet Captiva is 10 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | 5 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 97 litres | 589 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 97 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 477 litres | 589 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1577 litres | 1669 litres | |
| In 5-seat version Honda CR-V has more luggage space (by 112 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Honda CR-V (by 92 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.3 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Captiva is 0.5 metres more than that of the Honda CR-V, which means Chevrolet Captiva can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`513 kg | 2`200 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`878 kg | 1`653 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 635 kg | 547 kg | |
| Chevrolet Captiva load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 14 procentiem more than Honda CR-V. Therefore, Chevrolet Captiva is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Honda CR-V has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chevrolet Captiva has serious deffects in 145 percent more cases than Honda CR-V, so Honda CR-V quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6200 | 9800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Captiva has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |