Chevrolet Orlando 2011 vs Volkswagen Touran 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 360 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
| Chevrolet Orlando engine produces 23 HP more power than Volkswagen Touran, whereas torque is 40 NM more than Volkswagen Touran. Despite the higher power, Chevrolet Orlando reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 5.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Touran is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chevrolet Orlando consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Touran, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chevrolet Orlando could require 45 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chevrolet Orlando consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Touran. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1060 km in combined cycle | 1050 km in combined cycle | |
| 1300 km on highway | 1200 km on highway | ||
| 760 km with real consumption | 900 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 390'000 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 Orlando engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Chevrolet Cruze | Installed on at least 12 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Sharan, Audi A3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Touran might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.65 m | 4.40 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.63 m | 1.67 m | |
|
Chevrolet Orlando is larger, but lower. Chevrolet Orlando is 26 cm longer than the Volkswagen Touran, 8 cm wider, while the height of Chevrolet Orlando is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | 5 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 458 litres | 695 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 458 litres | 121 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | no data | 695 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
458 litres | 1989 litres | |
| In 7-seat version Chevrolet Orlando has more luggage space (by 337 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volkswagen Touran (by 1531 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.3 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Orlando is 0.1 metres more than that of the Volkswagen Touran. | |||
| 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`287 | 2`220 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Volkswagen Touran is better rated in child safety tests. The Volkswagen Touran scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 6200 | 6800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Orlando has
|
Volkswagen Touran has
| |