Opel Combo 2012 vs Chevrolet Orlando 2011
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 290 NM | 360 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.4 seconds | 10 seconds | |
|
Chevrolet Orlando is a more dynamic driving. Opel Combo engine produces 58 HP less power than Chevrolet Orlando, whereas torque is 70 NM less than Chevrolet Orlando. Due to the lower power, Opel Combo reaches 100 km/h speed 3.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.2 | 6.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.7 l/100km | 8.4 l/100km | |
|
The Opel Combo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Opel Combo consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Orlando, which means that by driving the Opel Combo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Opel Combo consumes 1.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Orlando. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1150 km in combined cycle | 1060 km in combined cycle | |
| 1270 km on highway | 1300 km on highway | ||
| 890 km with real consumption | 760 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 370'000 km | 440'000 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: | 10 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Fiat Bravo | Used also on Chevrolet Cruze | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Opel Combo might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.39 m | 4.65 m | |
| Width: | 1.83 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.85 m | 1.63 m | |
|
Opel Combo is smaller, but higher. Opel Combo is 26 cm shorter than the Chevrolet Orlando, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Opel Combo is 21 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | 5 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 790 litres | 458 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 458 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 790 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
3200 litres | 458 litres | |
| The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Opel Combo (by 2742 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 11.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Opel Combo is 0.1 metres less than that of the Chevrolet Orlando. | |||
| Power steering: | Electric power steering | Hydraulic power steering | |
| Electric power steering is simpler, quieter, more fuel-efficient, more configurable and provides additional features such as auto-steering for lane assist and parking. The disadvantages of electric power steering are possible overheating under prolonged load conditions and insufficient feedback (feeling) during steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`010 | 2`287 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 4600 | 5000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Opel Combo has
|
Chevrolet Orlando has
| |