Alsvin Basic vs Alsvin Full Option Comparison
Car Information
Engine / Motor
4
4
Dimensions
5 Seater
5 Seater
14
14
4
4
4390
4390
1725
1725
1468
1468
2535
2535
/
/
Fuel Economy
/
/
45
45
Comfort
✓
✓
/
/
/
/
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Interior
/
✓
✓
✓
/
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
/
/
/
/
✓
Safety
/
/
2
2
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
Infotainment
10.25
10.25
✓
✓
/
✓
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
✓
2
4
Transmission
DCT
DCT
5
5
DCT
DCT
Chassis & Steering
Front Wheel Drive
Front Wheel Drive
Wheels/brakes
✓
✓
Key Spec
1.5 L - 1.5 L
1.5 L - 1.5 L
105 BHP - 105 BHP
105 BHP - 105 BHP
Automatic & DCT
Automatic & DCT
Gasoline & Petrol
Gasoline & Petrol
TBD
TBD
5 - 5
5 - 5
Exterior
/
✓
/
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
/
✓
✓
/
/
✓
✓
/
/
/
Chrome
/
Electric
/
✓
Engine
1.5 L
1.5 L
Gasoline
Gasoline
105 BHP
105 BHP
145
145
Technologies
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
/
✓
✓
/
✓
Comparison of configuration highlights
Alsvin Basic
- Electronic engine immobilizer
- Power Tailgate
- Rear Defogger
- Rear Camera
- Anti-Theft Alarm System
- Number of Airbags
- Pedestrian airbag
- First Aid Kit
- Fire Extinguisher
- Collision Detection
- Parking Sensors - Front and Rear
- EBD (Electronic Brakeforce Distribution)
- ABS
Alsvin Full Option
- Audio Controls on Steering Wheel
- Electronic engine immobilizer
- Power Tailgate
- Rear Defogger
- Parking sensor rear
- Rear Camera
- Anti-Theft Alarm System
- Number of Airbags
- Pedestrian airbag
- First Aid Kit
- Fire Extinguisher
- Collision Detection
- Parking Sensors - Front and Rear
- EBD (Electronic Brakeforce Distribution)
- ABS
Review Comparison
Positive
- Competitive price compared to competitors
- Low fuel consumption
- Advanced technical features for its class
Negative
- Limited internal space
- Material quality can be improved
- Engine performance is limited on highways
Positive
- Competitive price compared to competitors
- Low fuel consumption
- Advanced technical features for its class
Negative
- Limited internal space
- Material quality can be improved
- Engine performance is limited on highways
Related comparisons
Editor's PickAlsvin Full Option
Expert / Editor Recommendation
Choose Alsvin Basic if you care more about overall equipment; choose Alsvin Full Option if you care more about overall equipment.
Popular Car Comparisons
Q&A
- According to fuel consumption data, Alsvin Basic has a fuel consumption of No data, while Alsvin Full Option has a fuel consumption of No data. Therefore, No data is more fuel-efficient.
- In terms of interior space, Alsvin Basic has a wheelbase of 2535, while Alsvin Full Option has a wheelbase of 2535. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, No data, offers more room.
- Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. Alsvin Basic uses Front Wheel Drive, while Alsvin Full Option uses Front Wheel Drive.