Ford EcoSport 2017 vs Skoda Yeti 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 122 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.6 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
Skoda Yeti is a more dynamic driving. Ford EcoSport engine produces 3 HP more power than Skoda Yeti, but torque is 30 NM less than Skoda Yeti. Despite the higher power, Ford EcoSport reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 6.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
By specification Ford EcoSport consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Yeti, which means that by driving the Ford EcoSport over 15,000 km in a year you can save 150 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Ford EcoSport consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Yeti. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 890 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 1040 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 660 km with real consumption | 780 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 380'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Skoda Yeti engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Ford Focus, Ford Mondeo, Ford C-Max | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Skoda Yeti engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.10 m | 4.22 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.65 m | 1.69 m | |
|
Ford EcoSport is smaller. Ford EcoSport is 13 cm shorter than the Skoda Yeti, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Ford EcoSport is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 356 litres | 405 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1238 litres | no data | |
|
Skoda Yeti has more luggage space. Ford EcoSport has 49 litres less trunk space than the Skoda Yeti. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford EcoSport is 0.3 metres more than that of the Skoda Yeti. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`775 | 1`940 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Ford EcoSport has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Skoda Yeti has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Ford EcoSport, so Ford EcoSport quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 14 800 | 8200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford EcoSport has
|
Skoda Yeti has
| |