Ford EcoSport 2015 vs Skoda Yeti 2013
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 95 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 215 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Skoda Yeti is a more dynamic driving. Ford EcoSport engine produces 45 HP less power than Skoda Yeti, whereas torque is 105 NM less than Skoda Yeti. Due to the lower power, Ford EcoSport reaches 100 km/h speed 3.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.4 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.1 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Ford EcoSport is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford EcoSport consumes 1.9 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 285 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford EcoSport consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Yeti. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1180 km in combined cycle | 950 km in combined cycle | |
| 1200 km on highway | 1090 km on highway | ||
| 850 km with real consumption | 840 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford EcoSport gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.27 m | 4.22 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.65 m | 1.69 m | |
| Ford EcoSport is 5 cm longer than the Skoda Yeti, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Ford EcoSport is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 333 litres | 322 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1238 litres | no data | |
| Ford EcoSport has 11 litres more trunk space than the Skoda Yeti. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford EcoSport is 0.6 metres more than that of the Skoda Yeti, which means Ford EcoSport can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`760 | 2`130 | |
| Safety: | 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 (€): | 10 200 | 7800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford EcoSport has
|
Skoda Yeti has
| |