Skoda Yeti 2013 vs Mitsubishi ASX 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 122 HP | 117 HP | |
| Torque: | 200 NM | 154 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 11.4 seconds | |
|
Skoda Yeti is more dynamic to drive. Skoda Yeti engine produces 5 HP more power than Mitsubishi ASX, whereas torque is 46 NM more than Mitsubishi ASX. Thanks to more power Skoda Yeti reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi ASX is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Skoda Yeti consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi ASX, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Skoda Yeti could require 120 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Skoda Yeti consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi ASX. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 900 km in combined cycle | 1080 km in combined cycle | |
| 1050 km on highway | 1280 km on highway | ||
| 740 km with real consumption | 910 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi ASX gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3 | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| 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: | 4.22 m | 4.30 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.69 m | 1.62 m | |
| Skoda Yeti is 7 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi ASX, 2 cm wider, while the height of Skoda Yeti is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 405 litres | 442 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1219 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi ASX has more luggage space. Skoda Yeti has 37 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi ASX. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Yeti is 0.3 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi ASX. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`955 | 1`870 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Mitsubishi ASX has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Skoda Yeti has serious deffects in 60 percent more cases than Mitsubishi ASX, so Mitsubishi ASX quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8800 | 11 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Yeti has
|
Mitsubishi ASX has
| |