Compare Chevrolet Evanda vs Toyota Corolla 11 vs Chevrolet Sonic
Variants
2.0
2.0 AT
1.33
1.4 D-4D
1.6
1.6 CVT
1.2 70PS
1.2 86PS
1.3D 75PS
1.3D 95PS
1.4 100PS
1.4 100PS AT
1.6
1.6 AT
Capacity
Cargo Capacity
435 L / 15.4 cu-ft
452 L / 16.0 cu-ft
Fuel Capacity
65.0 L / 17.2 gal
55.0 L / 14.5 gal
46.0 L / 12.2 gal
Passengers
5
5
5
Payload
490 kg / 1080 lbs
Chassis
Brakes | Front
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Disc
Brakes | Rear
Disc
Disc
Drum
Power Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Suspension | Front
Spring Strut
MacPherson strut
MacPherson
Suspension | Rear
Helical spring
Torsion
Torsion
Tire Size
205/65 R16
195/65 R15, 205/55 R16
Turning Circle
10.1 m / 33.0 ft
Construction
Body Style
4-door Sedan
4-door Sedan
4-door Sedan
Dimensions
Ground Clearance
125 mm / 4.9 in
Size | Height
1440 mm / 56.7 in
1465 mm / 57.7 in
1517 mm / 59.7 in
Size | Length
4770 mm / 187.8 in
4620 mm / 181.9 in
4399 mm / 173.2 in
Size | Width
1815 mm / 71.5 in
1775 mm / 69.9 in
1735 mm / 68.3 in
Track Width | Front
1550.0 mm / 61.0 in
1535.0 mm / 60.4 in
Track Width | Rear
1535.0 mm / 60.4 in
1535.0 mm / 60.4 in
Weight
1422.0 kg / 3135.0 lbs
Wheel Size
16 in
15 in, 16 in
Wheelbase
2700 mm / 106.3 in
2700 mm / 106.3 in
2525 mm / 99.4 in
Performance
Coefficient Of Drag
0.27
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 J
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
Transmission | Gears
6-speed
Production
Availability
2004 ~ 2006
2012 ~ 2019
Reviews
Neofiliac score
11%
21%
20%
Pros
- Good 0.27 drag coefficient
- Down to very low 3.7L/100km fuel consumption
- Small turning circle
Cons
- Horrible 0-100kph time
- Miserably low engine output
- Only available with small engines
- Limited by MacPherson strut front suspensions
- Horrible 0-100kph time
- Miserably low engine output
- Only available with small engines
- Stuck with MacPherson struts in the front
- Symbol of boring
- Questionable design
- Horrible 0-100kph time
- Can't even reach 200km/h
- Miserably low engine output
- Only available with small engines
- Stuck with MacPherson struts in the front
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.