Mitsubishi Colt 2007 vs Volkswagen Beetle 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 109 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 126 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 15.6 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 34 HP more power than Volkswagen Beetle, whereas torque is 19 NM more than Volkswagen Beetle. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 5.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 7.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.0 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Beetle, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Colt over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Beetle. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 870 km on highway | 940 km on highway | ||
| 670 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Beetle gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 310'000 km | 370'000 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 Volkswagen Beetle engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Smart ForFour, Mitsubishi Xpander | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Polo, Skoda Octavia, Skoda Fabia, Audi A2 | |
| 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 Volkswagen Beetle 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: | 3.88 m | 4.08 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.50 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is smaller. Mitsubishi Colt is 21 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Beetle, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 190 litres | 270 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Beetle has more luggage space. Mitsubishi Colt has 80 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Beetle. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 0.1 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Beetle. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`700 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Beetle has serious deffects in 115 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3400 | 3600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Volkswagen Beetle has
| |