Chevrolet Captiva 2011 vs Volvo XC60 2009
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.4 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 184 HP | 175 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 420 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.1 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
| Chevrolet Captiva engine produces 9 HP more power than Volvo XC60, but torque is 20 NM less than Volvo XC60. Thanks to more power Chevrolet Captiva reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 6.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.5 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo XC60 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 Volvo XC60, 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 3.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 1010 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 1250 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 1010 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo XC60 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: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Volvo XC60 2008: The car is fitted with Haldex Generation IV proactive automatic all-wheel drive. Haldex processes data from the ABS control unit and the engine control unit and can increase the pressure on the multi-disc clutch for faster engagement when required. It has a 100% front to 0% rear torque split when not engaged with a maximum 50% to 50% torque split between axes. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.67 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.73 m | 1.71 m | |
| Chevrolet Captiva is 4 cm longer than the Volvo XC60, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Chevrolet Captiva is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 477 litres | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1577 litres | 1455 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Chevrolet Captiva has 18 litres less trunk space than the Volvo XC60. This could mean that the Chevrolet Captiva uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Chevrolet Captiva (by 122 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Captiva is 0.1 metres less than that of the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`505 | 2`505 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Volvo XC60 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chevrolet Captiva has serious deffects in 175 percent more cases than Volvo XC60, so Volvo XC60 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5800 | 8200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Captiva has
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |