Compare two cars

Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion

Car #1
Make
Model
Variant
Engine
Car #2
Make
Model
Variant
Engine

compare selected cars
2012. - 2015.
J - SUV
suv, 5 door
4 x 4
Badges
Production
Vehicle class
Body style
Wheel drive
Safety
2011. - 2015.
J - SUV
suv, 5 door
4 x 4

Marketing

!function(v,t,o){var a=t.createElement("script");a.src="https://ad.vidverto.io/vidverto/js/aries/v1/invocation.js",a.setAttribute("fetchpriority","high");var r=v.top;r.document.head.appendChild(a),v.self!==v.top&&(v.frameElement.style.cssText="width:0px!important;height:0px!important;"),r.aries=r.aries||{},r.aries.v1=r.aries.v1||{commands:[]};var c=r.aries.v1;c.commands.push((function(){var d=document.getElementById("_vidverto-725dc94bb887f000f0b279c49613751c");d.setAttribute("id",(d.getAttribute("id")+(new Date()).getTime()));var t=v.frameElement||d;c.mount("10285",t,{width:720,height:405})}))}(window,document); */ ?>

Dimensons & Outlines

4300 mm
1810 mm
1695 mm
398 liters
1386 liters
66 liters
Length
Width
Height
Boot (min)
Boot (max)
Fuel tank
4673 mm
1849 mm
1727 mm
477 liters
1577 liters
65 liters
2012 Suzuki Grand Vitara
2011 Chevrolet Captiva

Engine

Petrol
4 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Nat. Asp.
2393 cc
169 hp
227 Nm
Engine
Fuel
Configuration
Aspiration
Displacement
Power
Torque
General Motors
2.4 LAF Ecotec
Petrol
4 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Nat. Asp.
2384 cc
167 hp
230 Nm

Performance (manual gearbox)

manual gearbox - 5 gears
1544 kg
11.7 s
185 km/h
11.4 l/100km
7.6 l/100km
9.0 l/100km
204 g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
manual gearbox - 6 gears
1843 kg
10.3 s
187 km/h
12.3 l/100km
7.6 l/100km
9.3 l/100km
218 g/km

Performance (automatic gearbox)

automatic - 4 gears
1559 kg
12.0 s
170 km/h
12.5 l/100km
8.1 l/100km
9.7 l/100km
221 g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
automatic - 6 gears
1868 kg
11.1 s
175 km/h
12.6 l/100km
7.5 l/100km
7.3 l/100km
219 g/km

Expenses

9500 EUR
Price from
9000 EUR

Virtual Adviser's™ opinion

Overview

Well, these are two pretty similar cars we have here! It's only details that could potentially make the difference. Considering they both belong to the suv segment and utilize the same 5-door suv body style and the 4 x 4 wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific petrol engine choice they offer. The first one has a Suzuki-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 169hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 167hp engine designed by General Motors.

Safety

Both vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the Chevrolet being a slightly better choice apparently. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. Both vehicles belong to the suv segment, which is generally a very good thing safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. On the other hand, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the American car offers a considerable difference of 19% more metal.

Reliability

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Suzuki does have a slight advantage, all the models observed together. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Suzuki with an average rating of 4.6, and models under the Chevrolet badge with 4.2 out of 5. Unfortunatelly, I don't have enough insight that would allow me to comment in more details on the specific models level. Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the Japanese car rank it on average as 3.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 2.0 out of 5.

Performance & Fuel economy

Chevrolet is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.4 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 187 kilometers per hour, 2km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 9.2 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (31 mpg), in combined cycle.


Verdict

Suzuki appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In my opinion, everything taken into account, the American car beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. It all continues in the same direction, with Chevrolet outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... It's not difficult to say then that if I'd need to make a choice, it would definitely be the Chevrolet. Nevertheless, let's not forget that people have different preferences and needs, so what really counts is your personal feel. I'm only here to help. I suggest you spend two more minutes in order to find out which car, based on your needs and budget, would be picked by the virtual adviser, among more than 12.000 different ones in our database.

Check a car by its VIN number

Follow us

AutoManiac Instagram

AutoManiac Facebook

AutoManiac database currently covers:

47worldwide automotive brands
1.592different vehicle models
2.311engines
14.428specific cars