Chevrolet Orlando 2011 vs Ford S-Max 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 360 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
|
Chevrolet Orlando is more dynamic to drive. Chevrolet Orlando engine produces 23 HP more power than Ford S-Max, whereas torque is 40 NM more than Ford S-Max. Thanks to more power Chevrolet Orlando reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 6.0 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1060 km in combined cycle | 1160 km in combined cycle | |
| 1300 km on highway | 1340 km on highway | ||
| 760 km with real consumption | 950 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford S-Max gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 560'000 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 Ford S-Max engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Chevrolet Cruze | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Ford Focus, Ford Mondeo, Ford Galaxy, Ford C-Max | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Ford S-Max might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Ford S-Max 2010 2.0 engine: In early production engines, the camshaft timing chain often stretched, requiring timely replacement to avoid potential issues. The fuel system, equipped with piezo injectors, is highly sensitive to fuel ... More about Ford S-Max 2010 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.65 m | 4.77 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.63 m | 1.66 m | |
|
Chevrolet Orlando is smaller. Chevrolet Orlando is 12 cm shorter than the Ford S-Max, width is practically the same , while the height of Chevrolet Orlando is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 458 litres | 285 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 458 litres | 285 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
458 litres | 2000 litres | |
| In 7-seat version Chevrolet Orlando has more luggage space (by 173 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford S-Max (by 1542 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.3 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Orlando is 0.3 metres less than that of the Ford S-Max. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`287 | 2`505 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Ford S-Max is better rated in child safety tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 5000 | 6800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Orlando has
|
Ford S-Max has
| |