Compare Chevrolet Nubira vs Chevrolet Cruze facelift vs Chevrolet Evanda
Variants
1.4
1.6
1.6 AT
1.8
1.8 AT
1.4T
1.4T AT
1.7D
2.0D
2.0D AT
2.0
2.0 AT
Capacity
Cargo Capacity
405 L / 14.3 cu-ft ~ 1225 L / 43.3 cu-ft
469 L / 16.6 cu-ft
435 L / 15.4 cu-ft
Fuel Capacity
60.0 L / 15.9 gal
60.0 L / 15.9 gal
65.0 L / 17.2 gal
Passengers
5
5
5
Payload
485 kg / 1069 lbs
538 kg / 1186 lbs
490 kg / 1080 lbs
Chassis
Brakes | Front
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Brakes | Rear
Disc
Disc
Disc
Power Steering
Electric Steering
Suspension | Front
MacPherson Strut
Independent, Spring MacPherson, with stabilizer
Spring Strut
Suspension | Rear
Double wishbone
Torsion
Helical spring
Tire Size
195/55 R15
205/65 R16
Construction
Body Style
4-door Sedan
4-door Sedan
4-door Sedan
Dimensions
Size | Height
1445 mm / 56.9 in
1477 mm / 58.1 in
1440 mm / 56.7 in
Size | Length
4515 mm / 177.8 in
4603 mm / 181.2 in
4770 mm / 187.8 in
Size | Width
1725 mm / 67.9 in
1797 mm / 70.7 in
1815 mm / 71.5 in
Track Width | Front
1480.0 mm / 58.3 in
1544.0 mm / 60.8 in
1550.0 mm / 61.0 in
Track Width | Rear
1480.0 mm / 58.3 in
1558.0 mm / 61.3 in
1535.0 mm / 60.4 in
Weight
1422.0 kg / 3135.0 lbs
Wheel Size
6J x 15
16 in
Wheelbase
2600 mm / 102.4 in
2685 mm / 105.7 in
2700 mm / 106.3 in
Powertrain
Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Emission Standard
Euro 5
Engine | Bore
86.0 mm / 3.4 in
Engine | Compression Ratio
9.6:1
Engine | Displacement
2.0 L / 121.9 cu-in / 1998.0 cc
Engine | Power
131.0 hp / 97.7 kW @ 5400 rpm
Engine | Specific Output
65.6 hp/L / 1.1 hp/cu-in
Engine | Stroke
86.0 mm / 3.4 in
Engine | Torque
181 Nm / 133.5 lb-ft @ 4200 rpm
Engine | Type
Naturally-aspirated multi-port injected petrol inline-4 DOHC engine with 4 values per cylinder
Naturally-aspirated multi-port injected petrol inline-4 DOHC engine with 4 values per cylinder
Transmission | Gears
6-speed
Production
Availability
2005 ~ 2010
2013 ~ 2016
2004 ~ 2006
Reviews
Neofiliac score
13%
11%
11%
Pros
- Certainly not conspicuous
- Decent exterior design
Cons
- Horrible 0-100kph time
- Can't even reach 200km/h
- Miserably low engine output
- Only available with small engines
- Rather poor fuel economy for the power output
- Questionable design
- Bad 0-100kph time
- No powerful engine options
- Only available with small engines
- Stuck with MacPherson struts in the front
- Horrible 0-100kph time
- Miserably low engine output
- Only available with small engines
- Limited by MacPherson strut front suspensions
Remove
Remove
Remove
Add up to 4 products to the comparison using the search bar above
Information on this page is provided on an as-is basis. No warranty on accuracy is implied. This page may contain affiliate links to third-party merchants such as Amazon and eBay. If you make a purchase using the supplied link, we may receive a commission. Neofiliac places the utmost respect for your privacy. We use no cookie whatsoever beyond that needed for the proper functioning of the website.