SQ6 e-tron vs Changan CS95 2024 Changan CS95 2024 2.0T Classic (7-Seater) FWD Comparison

Car Information

598 km

800V

/

/

9.8

Engine / Motor

/

185

/

4

Dimensions

5

7 Seater

514

/

64

/

/

/

4.949

/

1.930

/

1.790

/

2.810

Fuel Economy

/

10.5

/

74

Comfort

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Interior

11.9

/

Dinamica Microfibre

/

/

Sport Seats Plus

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Safety

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Infotainment

14.5

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Battery/Charging

270

/

11

/

10 min

/

Transmission

DHT

Automatic

/

Chassis & Steering

Four-Wheel Drive

Front Wheel Drive

/

/

Wheels/brakes

/

/

Key Spec

TBD

/

TBD

233 BHP

DHT

Automatic

Electric

Petrol

TBD

/

5

7 Seater

/

2.0 L

/

TBD

Exterior

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Engine

/

2.0 L

Electric

Petrol

/

233 BHP

/

360

Motor

Lithium-ion

/

489

/

Technologies

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Comparison of configuration highlights

  • SQ6 e-tron

    • 360 Degree Camera
  • Changan CS95 2024 Changan CS95 2024 2.0T Classic (7-Seater) FWD

    • Audio Controls on Steering Wheel
    • Electronic Engine Immobilizer
    • Power Tailgate
    • Rear Defogger
    • Push Button Start
    • Temperature Display
    • Keyless Entry
    • Welcome Light
    • Rear Camera
    • Steering Adjustment
    • Anti-Theft Alarm System
    • Number of Airbags
    • Advanced Air Bags System (AABS)
    • Door Reflectors
    • Pedestrian airbag
    • Fire Extinguisher
    • Crosswind Assist
    • Active Understeer Control (AUC)
    • Active Bonnet
    • Acceleration Skid Control
    • Collision Detection
    • Knee Bag - Driver
    • Speed Limiter
    • Auto Door Lock
    • Door Mirrors with Side Turn Signal
    • Vehicle Stability Control (VSC)
    • Parking Sensors - Front and Rear
    • EBD (Electronic Brakeforce Distribution)
    • ABS
    • Traction Control System (TCS / ASR, etc.)
    • Child Seat Interface (ISOFIX)
    • Active braking

Review Comparison

Positive

  • No data found

Negative

  • No data found

Positive

  • No data found

Negative

  • No data found

Related comparisons

Editor's PickChangan CS95 2024 Changan CS95 2024 2.0T Classic (7-Seater) FWD

Expert / Editor Recommendation

Choose SQ6 e-tron if you care more about overall equipment; choose Changan CS95 2024 Changan CS95 2024 2.0T Classic (7-Seater) FWD if you care more about overall equipment.

Popular Car Comparisons

Audi | SQ6 e-tron

VS

MG | MG ZS 2020 1.3T ZST

Audi | SQ6 e-tron

VS

Renault | Duster 1.6L PE (4x2) 2025

Audi | SQ6 e-tron

VS

Renault | All-New Duster PE 1.6L 4×2 CVT

Audi | SQ6 e-tron

VS

Renault | Renault Duster 2018 2.0L PE (4x2)

Audi | SQ6 e-tron

VS

BAIC | BAIC X35 2023 1.5L Elite

Q&A

  • According to fuel consumption data, SQ6 e-tron has a fuel consumption of No data, while Changan CS95 2024 Changan CS95 2024 2.0T Classic (7-Seater) FWD has a fuel consumption of 9.52. Therefore, No data is more fuel-efficient.
  • In terms of interior space, SQ6 e-tron has a wheelbase of No data, while Changan CS95 2024 Changan CS95 2024 2.0T Classic (7-Seater) FWD has a wheelbase of 2.810. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, No data, offers more room.
  • Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. SQ6 e-tron uses Four-Wheel Drive, while Changan CS95 2024 Changan CS95 2024 2.0T Classic (7-Seater) FWD uses Front Wheel Drive.