Chevrolet Captiva 2011 vs BMW X3 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 184 HP | |
| Torque: | 251 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 8.5 seconds | |
|
BMW X3 is a more dynamic driving. Chevrolet Captiva engine produces 21 HP less power than BMW X3, whereas torque is 129 NM less than BMW X3. Due to the lower power, Chevrolet Captiva reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.2 | 5.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The BMW X3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chevrolet Captiva consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chevrolet Captiva could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chevrolet Captiva consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 67 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1040 km in combined cycle | 1190 km in combined cycle | |
| 1220 km on highway | 1260 km on highway | ||
| 820 km with real consumption | 900 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.67 m | 4.65 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.73 m | 1.66 m | |
| Chevrolet Captiva is 2 cm longer than the BMW X3, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Chevrolet Captiva is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 477 litres | 550 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1577 litres | 1600 litres | |
|
BMW X3 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Chevrolet Captiva has 73 litres less trunk space than the BMW X3. 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 BMW X3 (by 23 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.3 meters | 11.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Captiva is 0.6 metres more than that of the BMW X3, 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 (kg): | 2`505 | 2`300 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| BMW X3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chevrolet Captiva has serious deffects in 170 percent more cases than BMW X3, so BMW X3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7000 | 13 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Captiva has
|
BMW X3 has
| |