Chevrolet Orlando 2011 vs Ford Galaxy 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 130 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 315 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.3 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
| Chevrolet Orlando engine produces 10 HP less power than Ford Galaxy, whereas torque is 5 NM less than Ford Galaxy. Despite less power, Chevrolet Orlando reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 5.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.5 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Galaxy 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 Ford Galaxy, 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 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Galaxy. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1060 km in combined cycle | 1220 km in combined cycle | |
| 1300 km on highway | 1420 km on highway | ||
| 750 km with real consumption | 980 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford Galaxy gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Ford Galaxy 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 Galaxy 2010 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.65 m | 4.82 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.63 m | 1.76 m | |
|
Chevrolet Orlando is smaller. Chevrolet Orlando is 17 cm shorter than the Ford Galaxy, width is practically the same , while the height of Chevrolet Orlando is 13 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 458 litres | 390 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 458 litres | 390 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
458 litres | 2325 litres | |
| In 7-seat version Chevrolet Orlando has more luggage space (by 68 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford Galaxy (by 1867 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.3 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Orlando is 0.6 metres less than that of the Ford Galaxy, which means Chevrolet Orlando can be easier 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: | 2`287 kg | 2`505 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`655 kg | 1`658 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 632 kg | 847 kg | |
| Chevrolet Orlando load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 34 procentiem less than Ford Galaxy. Therefore, Ford Galaxy is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | |||
| Ford Galaxy is better rated in child safety tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 4400 | 6600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Orlando has
|
Ford Galaxy has
| |