Chevrolet Captiva Sport

Chevrolet Captiva Sport: which version to buy

If you are choosing a Chevrolet Captiva Sport rather than reading a catalogue overview, the short answer is: buy the restyled 2.4 AT (171 hp, FWD) if you want the lightest, cheapest-to-run gasoline SUV 5-doors in this line; buy the restyled 3.6 AT (261 hp, FWD) if 0–100 km/h is the ranking you care about; buy the first-generation 2.0 MT (150 hp, AWD) if diesel torque and all-wheel drive matter mor…

If you are choosing a Chevrolet Captiva Sport rather than reading a catalogue overview, the short answer is: buy the restyled 2.4 AT (171 hp, FWD) if you want the lightest, cheapest-to-run gasoline SUV 5-doors in this line; buy the restyled 3.6 AT (261 hp, FWD) if 0–100 km/h is the ranking you care about; buy the first-generation 2.0 MT (150 hp, AWD) if diesel torque and all-wheel drive matter more than the later engines; skip the first-generation 2.4 AT (140 hp, AWD) unless you specifically need AWD on 95 fuel and will accept the slowest 0–100 in the whole model. Chevrolet lists 13 versions across one generation (January 2006–November 2011, then restyling November 2010–October 2015). There is no second generation in the data — only 1 generation and 1 generation, restyling.

Generations: what actually changed when you pick a later car

1 generation (2006-01-01 to 2011-11-30) is an SUV 5-doors with 7 versions. Every engine sits Front, transverse. Every gearbox is labelled Automatic with 5 gears. Ground clearance is 200 mm on every version that lists it. The tank is 65 L. Diesels exist here and nowhere else in the model. You can have FWD or AWD. Boost is No on gasoline and Turbo on Diesel.

1 generation, restyling (2010-11-01 to 2015-10-31) is still SUV 5-doors, now with 6 versions. Diesel is gone. The Automatic becomes 6 gears. The tank grows from 65 L to 72 L (+7 L, +10.8%). Rear brakes change from Disc to Disc ventilated. Ground clearance is not measured. Wheel sizes are not measured in either period. The restyle overlap (November 2010–November 2011) is a date window, not a third generation.

What the restyle buys in numbers, not adjectives: more power per litre on the four-cylinder gasoline, a sixth gear, 7 L more tank, ventilated discs at the rear, and a kerb-weight drop on comparable FWD fours. What it costs: no Diesel, no 200 mm clearance figure, and AWD only on the 6-cylinder cars.

Engines and specs (every version, exact names)

Identical names are not identical cars. Distinguish 2.4 AT by 140 / 171 / 182 hp and by FWD vs AWD. Distinguish 2.0 AT by 127 vs 150 hp and by FWD vs AWD. Distinguish 3.0 AT and 3.6 AT by drive. The listing named 2.0 MT still carries Automatic and 5 in the gearbox fields — use that label, not an invented manual.

Power per litre (hp ÷ litres from the cc figure): restyle 3.0 AT 264 hp is 88.2 hp/L; restyle 2.4 AT 182 hp is 76.3 hp/L; restyle 2.4 AT 171 hp is 71.7 hp/L; first-gen 2.0 AT / 2.0 MT 150 hp is 75.3 hp/L; first-gen 3.2 AT is 71.0 hp/L; restyle 3.6 AT is 73.2 hp/L; first-gen 2.0 AT 127 hp is 63.8 hp/L; first-gen 2.4 AT 140 hp is 58.2 hp/L. The restyle 3.0 is the densest engine; the original 2.4 is the least dense.

Torque per litre: first-gen Diesel 320 Nm / 1.991 L = 160.7 Nm/L. Restyle 3.6 AT 336 / 3.564 = 94.3 Nm/L. Restyle 3.0 AT 306 / 2.994 = 102.2 Nm/L. First-gen 3.2 AT 297 / 3.195 = 93.0 Nm/L. First-gen 2.4 AT 220 / 2.405 = 91.5 Nm/L. Restyle 2.4 AT 171 hp is 91.4 Nm/L; the 182 hp 2.4 AT is 97.7 Nm/L. If you buy on low-rpm pull, the 1991 cc Turbo Diesel still wins the arithmetic even against the later V-shaped sixes.

Peak torque rpm: Diesel 2000; first-gen 2.4 AT 2400; restyle 3.6 AT 2100; first-gen 3.2 AT 3200; restyle 2.4 AT 182 hp at 4900 and 171 hp at 5100; restyle 3.0 AT 306 Nm at 5100 — same rpm as its 264 hp peak. A restyle 3.0 AT makes its torque at the same 5100 rpm as peak power; a restyle 3.6 AT makes 336 Nm at 2100. That 3000 rpm gap is why 3.6 AT is the better “six” if you care about the torque number arriving early.

Performance and economy: ranking by 0–100, top speed, mpg-style L/100 km

Fastest 0–100 km/h: restyle 3.6 AT FWD 8.4 s, then 3.6 AT AWD 8.5 s (+0.1 s). First-gen 3.2 AT AWD is 8.8 s — 0.4 s slower than the restyle FWD 3.6, despite 227 vs 261 hp. Restyle 3.0 AT AWD 9.5 s, restyle 3.0 AT FWD 9.6 s, restyle 2.4 AT 182 hp 9.6 s. First-gen 2.0 MT 150 hp is 10.3 s. Restyle 2.4 AT 171 hp is 11.3 s. First-gen 2.4 AT FWD 11.8 s; 2.0 AT 150 hp AWD 12.1 s; 2.0 AT 127 hp FWD 12.1 s; 2.0 AT 127 hp AWD 12.3 s. Slowest: first-gen 2.4 AT AWD 12.9 s. Spread: 12.9 − 8.4 = 4.5 s from worst to best.

Top speed: 210 km/h on all four restyle six-cylinder cars (3.0 AT FWD, 3.0 AT AWD, 3.6 AT FWD, 3.6 AT AWD). First-gen 3.2 AT is 203 km/h (−7). Restyle 2.4 AT 182 hp is 197. First-gen 2.0 AT 127 hp FWD, 2.0 MT, and restyle 2.4 AT 171 hp all 180. First-gen 2.0 AT 127 hp AWD and 2.0 AT 150 hp AWD: 178. First-gen 2.4 AT FWD: 175. Slowest: first-gen 2.4 AT AWD 168 km/h. Spread: 210 − 168 = 42 km/h.

Mixed consumption, lowest first: first-gen 2.0 AT 150 hp and 2.0 MT 7.5 L/100 km; restyle 2.4 AT 171 hp 8.5; first-gen 2.0 AT 127 hp (both drives) 8.6; restyle 2.4 AT 182 hp 9.0; first-gen 2.4 AT FWD 9.4; restyle 3.0 AT FWD 10.1; restyle 3.6 AT both drives 10.4; first-gen 2.4 AT AWD 10.8; restyle 3.0 AT AWD 10.9; first-gen 3.2 AT 11.6. City: 2.0 MT 8.9 is the only version under 10 L/100 km in town; restyle 2.4 AT 171 hp is 10.0; first-gen 3.2 AT is 16.4. Highway: restyle 2.4 AT 171 hp 6.7; Diesel AWD 6.8; first-gen 2.4 AT FWD 7.2; restyle 3.2 is not in the restyle — first-gen 3.2 AT highway 8.9 is the thirstiest highway figure.

CO2 is not measured on any version. Eco class is not measured on any version.

AWD vs FWD on the same engine, first generation 2.4 AT 140 hp: AWD is 1.1 s slower to 100 (12.9 vs 11.8), 7 km/h slower on top (168 vs 175), +1.6 city / +1.3 highway / +1.4 mixed. Same comparison on 2.0 AT 127 hp: AWD is 0.2 s slower (12.3 vs 12.1), 2 km/h slower (178 vs 180), +0.6 city, but −0.5 highway (6.8 vs 7.3); mixed is identical at 8.6. Restyle 3.6 AT: AWD +0.1 s, same 210 km/h, +0.7 city / +0.4 highway, mixed identical 10.4. Restyle 3.0 AT: AWD is 0.1 s faster (9.5 vs 9.6), same 210, +0.8 city / +0.7 highway / +0.8 mixed. AWD is not a free extra: on the 2.4 it costs more than a second and 1.4 L/100 km mixed; on the restyle 3.6 it costs almost nothing in time.

Dimensions and weight: kg per horsepower

Kerb weight is not measured on first-gen 2.4 AT FWD and first-gen 2.0 AT 127 hp FWD. Gross is not measured on first-gen 2.4 AT FWD.

Measured kerb, lightest first: restyle 2.4 AT 171 hp 1603 kg; restyle 3.0 AT FWD 1647; restyle 3.6 AT FWD 1710; restyle 2.4 AT 182 hp 1724; restyle 3.0 AT AWD 1729; first-gen 2.4 AT AWD 1735; 2.0 MT 1745; 2.0 AT 150 hp 1755; first-gen 3.2 AT and restyle 3.6 AT AWD both 1775; first-gen 2.0 AT 127 hp AWD 1805 (heaviest kerb).

kg per hp (kerb ÷ hp), where kerb exists: restyle 3.0 AT FWD 1647/264 = 6.24 kg/hp (best); restyle 3.0 AT AWD 6.55; restyle 3.6 AT FWD 6.55; restyle 3.6 AT AWD 6.80; first-gen 3.2 AT 7.82; restyle 2.4 AT 171 hp 9.37; restyle 2.4 AT 182 hp 9.47; 2.0 MT 11.63; 2.0 AT 150 hp 11.70; first-gen 2.4 AT AWD 12.39; first-gen 2.0 AT 127 hp AWD 14.21 (worst). The restyle sixes carry about half as many kilograms per horsepower as the original 127 hp diesel AWD.

Gross: restyle 2.4 AT 171 hp 2111 kg is the lowest; first-gen 3.2 AT 2310 is the highest (+199 kg). Payload (gross − kerb) where both exist: restyle 3.0 AT FWD 2214 − 1647 = 567 kg; restyle 3.0 AT AWD 565; restyle 3.6 AT AWD 504; restyle 3.6 AT FWD 508; restyle 2.4 AT 171 hp 508; restyle 2.4 AT 182 hp 465; first-gen 3.2 AT 535; first-gen 2.4 AT AWD 490; 2.0 AT 150 hp 470; 2.0 MT 480; 2.0 AT 127 hp AWD 420. The restyle 3.0 AT FWD has the largest measured payload; the 127 hp diesel AWD has the smallest.

Tank: 65 L first generation, 72 L restyle. Range arithmetic on mixed figures (tank ÷ mixed × 100): 2.0 MT / 2.0 AT 150 hp 65/7.5×100 ≈ 867 km; restyle 2.4 AT 171 hp 72/8.5×100 ≈ 847 km; restyle 3.0 AT FWD 72/10.1×100 ≈ 713 km; first-gen 3.2 AT 65/11.6×100 ≈ 560 km. The diesel’s smaller tank still covers more mixed kilometres than the restyle 3.0.

Ground clearance 200 mm on all seven first-generation versions. Restyle: not measured. Wheels: not measured on all 13.

Which version to choose

Daily gasoline, restyle, FWD: 2.4 AT 171 hp. Lightest kerb (1603 kg), lowest restyle mixed (8.5), lowest restyle city (10.0), lowest highway in the whole model (6.7), 72 L tank, Automatic 6. Versus the same-name 2.4 AT 182 hp you give up 11 hp, 15 Nm, 1.7 s (11.3 vs 9.6) and 17 km/h (180 vs 197), and you save 0.5 mixed and 121 kg kerb (1603 vs 1724). Versus first-gen 2.4 AT 140 hp FWD you gain 31 hp on 21 cc less (2384 vs 2405), 0.5 s, 5 km/h, and 0.9 mixed (8.5 vs 9.4). You do not get AWD.

Daily gasoline that must also be quick: restyle 2.4 AT 182 hp. Same 2384 cc Inline 4, FWD, Automatic 6, but 182 hp at 6700 rpm and 233 Nm at 4900. 9.6 s matches the restyle 3.0 AT FWD’s 9.6 s with 82 fewer hp, and mixed is 9.0 vs 10.1 (−1.1). You still lose to 3.6 AT FWD by 1.2 s (9.6 vs 8.4).

Fastest Chevrolet Captiva Sport in the data: restyle 3.6 AT FWD — 8.4 s, 210 km/h, 336 Nm at 2100, 1710 kg. 3.6 AT AWD is 8.5 s and 1775 kg (+65 kg, +0.1 s) if you need AWD after 2010. The 3 hp gap versus 3.0 AT (261 vs 264) is the wrong comparison: 3.6 AT FWD is 1.2 s quicker than 3.0 AT FWD because 336 Nm at 2100 beats 306 Nm at 5100. Specific output favours 3.0 AT (88.2 vs 73.2 hp/L); the stopwatch favours 3.6 AT.

Most power, lightest six: restyle 3.0 AT FWD — 264 hp, 1647 kg, 6.24 kg/hp, Direct injection (direct), compression 11.7, 9.6 s, 210 km/h, mixed 10.1. 3.0 AT AWD is 1729 kg and 9.5 s with mixed 10.9. Boost is not measured on either 3.0.

AWD gasoline, first generation only: 3.2 AT — 227 hp Inline 6, 8.8 s, 203 km/h, 1775 kg, mixed 11.6, 65 L, 200 mm clearance. It is 0.4 s slower than restyle 3.6 AT FWD and 0.3 s slower than restyle 3.6 AT AWD, uses 1.2 L/100 km more mixed than restyle 3.6 AT, and has 34 fewer hp than restyle 3.0 AT. Buy it when you need AWD and 200 mm and cannot use the restyle sixes.

Diesel, torque, AWD: first-gen 2.0 MT 150 hp if you want the 10.3 s time and 8.9 city / 7.5 mixed; 2.0 AT 150 hp if the badge must say AT (same 320 Nm, same AWD, 12.1 s, 11.5 city, 7.5 mixed). City delta AT versus MT at 150 hp: +2.6 L/100 km. Both beat every gasoline mixed figure except they lose to nothing on torque (320 Nm). The 127 hp 2.0 AT twins make the same 320 Nm; AWD 12.3 s / 1805 kg, FWD 12.1 s / kerb not measured. Do not buy 127 hp if 150 hp exists: you lose 23 hp for the same torque, same 8.6 mixed on the 127s versus 7.5 on the 150s (−1.1 mixed), and 0.2–2.0 s depending on which 150 you compare.

Do not buy unless the constraint is unique: first-gen 2.4 AT 140 hp AWD — slowest 0–100 (12.9), lowest top speed (168), mixed 10.8, 12.39 kg/hp. The only unique box it ticks is Gasoline AWD with 200 mm and 65 L. First-gen 2.4 AT FWD is 1.1 s and 7 km/h better, mixed 9.4, but kerb and gross are not measured.

Problems and reliability: not measured in this dataset. No failure rates, no service intervals, no prices. Chassis pattern that is measured: Independent, spring front and rear on all 13; Ventilated disc front on all 13; rear Disc on 1 generation and Disc ventilated on the restyle.

Decision in one line. Restyle 2.4 AT 171 hp for economy and mass; restyle 2.4 AT 182 hp for a four-cylinder that matches the 3.0 AT FWD’s 9.6 s; restyle 3.6 AT FWD (or AWD) for the stopwatch; restyle 3.0 AT FWD for hp/L and kg/hp; first-gen 2.0 MT 150 hp for Diesel AWD and the lowest city figure; first-gen 3.2 AT only if you must have a gasoline Inline 6 AWD with 200 mm before the restyle sixes. Keep the names exactly as listed: 2.4 AT, 3.2 AT, 2.0 AT, 2.0 MT, 3.0 AT, 3.6 AT.