Volvo XC60 2008 vs Chevrolet Captiva 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Petrol | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Volvo XC60) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Chevrolet Captiva) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
| 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: | 285 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.5 seconds | 12.2 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC60 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo XC60 engine produces 135 HP more power than Chevrolet Captiva, whereas torque is 80 NM more than Chevrolet Captiva. Thanks to more power Volvo XC60 reaches 100 km/h speed 4.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.9 | 8.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.1 l/100km | 10.1 l/100km | |
|
The Chevrolet Captiva is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo XC60 consumes 3.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Captiva, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo XC60 could require 480 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo XC60 consumes 2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Captiva. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 580 km in combined cycle | 740 km in combined cycle | |
| 780 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| 570 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| 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: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 230 mm (9.1 inches) | 200 mm (7.9 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Volvo XC60 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 | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 530'000 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: | 3 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Volvo S80 | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Opel Antara, Chevrolet Epica, Chevrolet Cruze | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Chevrolet Captiva might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.63 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.89 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.72 m | |
| Volvo XC60 is 1 cm shorter than the Chevrolet Captiva, 4 cm wider, while the height of Volvo XC60 is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 5 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 495 litres | 465 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 465 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 495 litres | 465 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1455 litres | 930 litres | |
| In 5-seat version Volvo XC60 has more luggage space (by 30 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo XC60 (by 525 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 11.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo XC60 is 0.4 metres more than that of the Chevrolet Captiva, which means Volvo XC60 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`440 | 2`505 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | high | low | |
| Volvo XC60 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chevrolet Captiva has serious deffects in 140 percent more cases than Volvo XC60, so Volvo XC60 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8600 | 4600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC60 has
|
Chevrolet Captiva has
| |