Chevrolet Orlando 2011 vs Chevrolet Captiva 2006
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Body: | Minivan / MPV | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
| Engine: | 1.4 - 2.0 | 2.0 - 3.2 | |
| Power: | 130 - 163 HP | 127 - 230 HP | |
| Torque: | 176 - 360 NM | 220 - 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 - 11.6 seconds | 8.8 - 12.2 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 - 7.9 | 7.4 - 11.5 | |
| Chevrolet Orlando petrol engines consumes on average 2.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than Chevrolet Captiva. On average, Chevrolet Orlando equipped with diesel engines consume 2.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Captiva. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
| Length: | 4.65 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.63 m | 1.73 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Chevrolet Orlando is 2 cm longer than the Chevrolet Captiva, 2 cm wider, while the height of Chevrolet Orlando is 9 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 458 litres | 465 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Chevrolet Orlando has 7 litres less trunk space than the Chevrolet Captiva. This could mean that the Chevrolet Orlando uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.3 meters | 11.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Orlando is 0.2 metres less than that of the Chevrolet Captiva. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`228 | ~ 2`096 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 6000 | 5000 | |
|
| ||