Chevrolet Orlando 2011 vs Subaru Forester 2008
| Body: | Minivan / MPV | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 147 HP | |
| Torque: | 360 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
Chevrolet Orlando is more dynamic to drive. Chevrolet Orlando engine produces 16 HP more power than Subaru Forester, whereas torque is 10 NM more than Subaru Forester. Thanks to more power Chevrolet Orlando reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.5 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km | |
|
By specification Chevrolet Orlando consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Subaru Forester, which means that by driving the Chevrolet Orlando over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Chevrolet Orlando consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Subaru Forester. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1060 km in combined cycle | 1010 km in combined cycle | |
| 1300 km on highway | 1100 km on highway | ||
| 850 km with real consumption | 880 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 350'000 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 | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Chevrolet Cruze | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Subaru Outback, Subaru Legacy | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Subaru Forester might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Chevrolet Orlando engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.65 m | 4.56 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.63 m | 1.70 m | |
|
Chevrolet Orlando is larger, but lower. Chevrolet Orlando is 9 cm longer than the Subaru Forester, 10 cm wider, while the height of Chevrolet Orlando is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | no data | |
| Trunk capacity: | 458 litres | 450 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 458 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | no data | 450 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
458 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.3 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Orlando is 0.7 metres more than that of the Subaru Forester, which means Chevrolet Orlando can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`287 | 2`050 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 6200 | 4200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Orlando has
|
Subaru Forester has
| |