Chevrolet Captiva 2006 vs Volvo XC60 2008
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.4 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.2 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC60 is a more dynamic driving. Chevrolet Captiva engine produces 13 HP less power than Volvo XC60, whereas torque is 20 NM less than Volvo XC60. Due to the lower power, Chevrolet Captiva reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.7 | 8.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.1 l/100km | 8.6 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo XC60 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chevrolet Captiva consumes 0.4 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 60 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chevrolet Captiva consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 890 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 810 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: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 200 mm (7.9 inches) | 230 mm (9.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Volvo XC60 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.64 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.71 m | |
| Chevrolet Captiva is 1 cm longer than the Volvo XC60, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Chevrolet Captiva is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | 5 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 465 litres | 495 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 465 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 465 litres | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
930 litres | 1455 litres | |
| In 5-seat version Volvo XC60 has more luggage space (by 30 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo XC60 (by 525 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.5 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Captiva is 0.4 metres less than that of the Volvo XC60, which means Chevrolet Captiva can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`505 | 2`505 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | high | |
| Volvo XC60 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chevrolet Captiva has serious deffects in 140 percent more cases than Volvo XC60, so Volvo XC60 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4600 | 8000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Captiva has
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |