Opel Astra H vs Lada VAZ-2110: specs side by side
Quick comparison from catalog data - no editorial review of this pair yet.
Opel · 2004–2010
Astra H
- Power
- 66 kW90 PS
- Kerb mass
- 1,230 kg
Lada · 1995–2007
VAZ-2110
- Power
- 52 kW71 PS
- Kerb mass
- -
Photo: Dmitry Terekhov / Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0
At a glance
Who suits what, worked out from the catalog figures of the versions above.
Categories won: Astra H 0 VAZ-2110 1
- Family VAZ-2110 Boot: 416 l vs 380 l
- City Too close to call Length: 4,249 mm vs 4,265 mm
In plain words
Opel Astra H has more power: 66 kW (90 PS) against 52 kW (71 PS) for Lada VAZ-2110. Lada VAZ-2110 is 16 mm longer than Opel Astra H (4,265 mm vs 4,249 mm). Lada VAZ-2110 has the bigger boot: 416 l against 380 l. Lada VAZ-2110 is the older design (from 1995); Opel Astra H arrived in 2004. On the catalog figures, the Lada VAZ-2110 is the pick for family. Our catalog has no kerb mass for the Lada VAZ-2110 yet, so some checks above leave it out.
Size and weight
| Astra H | VAZ-2110 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 4,249 mm167.3 in | 4,265 mm167.9 in +16 mm +0.6 in +0.4% |
| Boot | 380 l13.4 cu ft | 416 l14.7 cu ft +36 l +1.3 cu ft +9.5% |
| Fits a standard garage? | Yes | No data |
Difference vs Astra H (±). Garage check: a standard single garage takes a car up to about 5.0 m (16 ft 5 in) long and 1.9 m (6 ft 3 in) wide (width as listed in the catalog; some makers include the mirrors). Leave about 0.6 m (2 ft) to open the doors.
Full specifications
| Opel Astra H | Lada VAZ-2110 | |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Version | 1.3 · petrol · 66 kW (90 PS) | 1.5 · 52 kW (71 PS) |
| Production years | 2004–2010 | 1995–2007 |
| Body | Sedan, Hatchback | Sedan |
| Country | Germany | No data |
| Performance | ||
| Power Why it matters: More power means stronger acceleration and easier overtaking, especially with a full load. | 66 kW (90 PS) 89 hp Better | 52 kW (71 PS) 70 hp |
| Power, all versions | 66–177 kW (90–241 PS) 89–237 hp | 52–67 kW (71–91 PS) 70–90 hp |
| Power per tonne | 54 kW/t 65 hp/ton calculated | No data |
| Engine and transmission | ||
| Fuel | Petrol | Petrol |
| Engine | 1,300 cc 1.3 l | 1,500 cc 1.5 l |
| Drive | Front-wheel drive | Front-wheel drive |
| Dimensions and weight | ||
| Length | 4,249 mm 167.3 in | 4,265 mm 167.9 in |
| Width | 1,753 mm 69.0 in | No data |
| Height | 1,440 mm 56.7 in | No data |
| Wheelbase | 2,614 mm 102.9 in | No data |
| Kerb weight Why it matters: A lighter car is usually more agile and uses less energy. | 1,230 kg 2,712 lb | No data |
| Boot Why it matters: A bigger boot fits more luggage, shopping or a pram. | 380 l 13.4 cu ft | 416 l 14.7 cu ft Better |
| Economy and running costs | ||
| Fuel consumption Why it matters: Lower consumption cuts running costs and CO₂ emissions on every trip. | No data | 7.5 l/100 km 31.4 mpg US |
| Fuel cost per year | No data | €1,970/year estimated |
| Safety | ||
| Euro NCAP | ★★★★★ (2004) | No data |
These cars do not differ in the data we have.
Equal rows hidden (2): Fuel, Drive.
Better marks the stronger figure - only for measurable specs (power, torque, 0–100 km/h, consumption, boot, weight).
Estimated at 15,000 km a year with fuel at €1.75/l petrol.