Chevrolet Traverse 2009 vs Subaru B9 Tribeca 2007
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
---|---|---|---|
Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Chevrolet Traverse is available with front wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive, while Subaru B9 Tribeca can be equipped only with four wheel (4x4) drive. All-wheel drive models tend to consume more fuel, so if you don't need off road capabilities, Chevrolet Traverse also offers 2-wheel drive versions for fuel economy. 2WD versions also have lower maintenance costs. | |||
Engines: | 3.6 | 3.6 | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 281 - 288 HP | 260 HP | |
Torque: | 361 - 366 NM | 350 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.8 - 10.2 | 11.6 | |
Chevrolet Traverse petrol engines consumes on average 1.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than Subaru B9 Tribeca. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 5.21 m | 4.86 m | |
Width: | no data | 1.88 m | |
Height: | 1.85 m | 1.68 m | |
Trunk capacity: | 691 litres | 235 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
3296 litres | no data | |
Chevrolet Traverse has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Chevrolet Traverse has 456 litres more trunk space than the Subaru B9 Tribeca. The Subaru B9 Tribeca may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
Turning diameter: | no data | no data | |
Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`930 | no data | |
Safety: | no data | no data | |
Quality: | no data | no data | |
Average price (€): | no data | 5600 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Traverse has
|
| |