Chevrolet Captiva 2006 vs Mitsubishi Outlander 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.3 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 177 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.2 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Outlander is a more dynamic driving. Chevrolet Captiva engine produces 27 HP less power than Mitsubishi Outlander, whereas torque is 60 NM less than Mitsubishi Outlander. Due to the lower power, Chevrolet Captiva reaches 100 km/h speed 2.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.7 | 6.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.1 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Outlander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chevrolet Captiva consumes 2.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chevrolet Captiva could require 375 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chevrolet Captiva consumes 2.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Outlander. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 960 km in combined cycle | |
| 890 km on highway | 1130 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Outlander gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 200 mm (7.9 inches) | 215 mm (8.5 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mitsubishi Outlander 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 | 15 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 L 200, Mitsubishi ASX | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Chevrolet Captiva engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.64 m | 4.67 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.68 m | |
| Chevrolet Captiva is 3 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Outlander, 5 cm wider, while the height of Chevrolet Captiva is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | 5 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 465 litres | 774 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 465 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 465 litres | 774 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
930 litres | 1691 litres | |
| In 5-seat version Mitsubishi Outlander has more luggage space (by 309 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Outlander (by 761 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.5 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Captiva is 0.9 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Outlander, which means Chevrolet Captiva can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`505 | 2`170 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Mitsubishi Outlander has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chevrolet Captiva has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Outlander, so Mitsubishi Outlander quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4400 | 5800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Captiva has
|
Mitsubishi Outlander has
| |