Citroen C-Crosser 2007 vs Chevrolet Captiva 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Petrol | 2.4 Petrol | |
| 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: | 170 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 232 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Citroen C-Crosser is more dynamic to drive. Citroen C-Crosser engine produces 34 HP more power than Chevrolet Captiva, whereas torque is 12 NM more than Chevrolet Captiva. Thanks to more power Citroen C-Crosser reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 | 9.3 | |
| Citroen C-Crosser consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Captiva, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen C-Crosser could require 15 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 630 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 780 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| Chevrolet Captiva gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 174 mm (6.9 inches) | 200 mm (7.9 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Chevrolet Captiva can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 19 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mitsubishi Outlander, Peugeot 4007 | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Citroen C-Crosser might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Chevrolet Captiva 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 | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.67 m | 1.72 m | |
| Citroen C-Crosser is 1 cm longer than the Chevrolet Captiva, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Citroen C-Crosser is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 5 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 441 litres | 465 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 184 litres | 465 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 441 litres | 465 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1686 litres | 930 litres | |
| In 7-seat version Chevrolet Captiva has more luggage space (by 281 litres). In 5-seat version Chevrolet Captiva has more luggage space (by 24 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Citroen C-Crosser (by 756 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 12.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen C-Crosser is 0.1 metres less than that of the Chevrolet Captiva. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`290 | 2`395 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 6000 | 4600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen C-Crosser has
|
Chevrolet Captiva has
| |