Kia Optima 2000 vs Chevrolet Captiva 2006
| Body: | Sedan | 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: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 169 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.8 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Kia Optima is more dynamic to drive. Kia Optima engine produces 33 HP more power than Chevrolet Captiva, whereas torque is 10 NM more than Chevrolet Captiva. Thanks to more power Kia Optima reaches 100 km/h speed 2.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.4 | 9.3 | |
|
The Chevrolet Captiva is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Kia Optima consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Captiva, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Kia Optima could require 165 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 850 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| Chevrolet Captiva gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 560'000 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 Captiva engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Hyundai Sonata, Kia Magentis | 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. Kia Optima might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.73 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.72 m | |
| Kia Optima is 9 cm longer than the Chevrolet Captiva, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Kia Optima is 31 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 479 litres | 465 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 465 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 479 litres | 465 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 930 litres | |
| In 5-seat version Kia Optima has more luggage space (by 14 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 12.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Kia Optima is 1.7 metres less than that of the Chevrolet Captiva, which means Kia Optima can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`855 | 2`405 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 4400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Kia Optima has
|
Chevrolet Captiva has
| |