Chevrolet Captiva 2006 vs Citroen C-Crosser 2007
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 156 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.2 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
Citroen C-Crosser is a more dynamic driving. Chevrolet Captiva engine produces 6 HP less power than Citroen C-Crosser, whereas torque is 60 NM less than Citroen C-Crosser. Due to the lower power, Chevrolet Captiva reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.7 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.1 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen C-Crosser is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chevrolet Captiva consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C-Crosser, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chevrolet Captiva could require 225 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chevrolet Captiva consumes 2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C-Crosser. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 890 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
| Citroen C-Crosser gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Ground clearance: | 200 mm (7.9 inches) | 174 mm (6.9 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: | 530'000 km | 480'000 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: | 5 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Opel Antara, Chevrolet Epica, Chevrolet Cruze | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mitsubishi Outlander, Peugeot 4007 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Chevrolet Captiva might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.64 m | 4.65 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.67 m | |
| Chevrolet Captiva is 1 cm shorter than the Citroen C-Crosser, 4 cm wider, while the height of Chevrolet Captiva is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 465 litres | 184 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 465 litres | 184 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 465 litres | 441 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
930 litres | 1686 litres | |
| In 7-seat version Chevrolet Captiva has more luggage space (by 281 litres). In 5-seat version Chevrolet Captiva has more luggage space (by 24 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Citroen C-Crosser (by 756 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.5 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Captiva is 0.5 metres less than that of the Citroen C-Crosser, which means Chevrolet Captiva can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`505 | 2`410 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 4400 | 6400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Captiva has
|
Citroen C-Crosser has
| |