Chevrolet Cruze 2012 vs Skoda Rapid 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.2 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: | 141 HP | 86 HP | |
| Torque: | 176 NM | 160 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.1 seconds | 11.8 seconds | |
|
Chevrolet Cruze is more dynamic to drive. Chevrolet Cruze engine produces 55 HP more power than Skoda Rapid, whereas torque is 16 NM more than Skoda Rapid. Thanks to more power Chevrolet Cruze reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 5.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.7 l/100km | 6.2 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Rapid is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chevrolet Cruze consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Rapid, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chevrolet Cruze could require 225 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chevrolet Cruze consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Rapid. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 900 km in combined cycle | 1070 km in combined cycle | |
| 770 km with real consumption | 880 km with real consumption | ||
| Skoda Rapid gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 350'000 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 Chevrolet Cruze engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Chevrolet Orlando | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Volkswagen Caddy, Skoda Fabia, Audi A1 | |
| 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 Rapid 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. | |||
| Skoda Rapid 2012 1.2 engine: Although the engine has a chain, its lifespan is relatively low. There tends to be increased vibration at idling speed. Problems with the fuel pressure pump may be the first sign of a petrol smell in the oil. ... More about Skoda Rapid 2012 1.2 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.51 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Chevrolet Cruze is larger. Chevrolet Cruze is 3 cm longer than the Skoda Rapid, 9 cm wider, while the height of Chevrolet Cruze is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 413 litres | 550 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1490 litres | |
|
Skoda Rapid has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Chevrolet Cruze has 137 litres less trunk space than the Skoda Rapid. This could mean that the Chevrolet Cruze uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Cruze is 0.7 metres more than that of the Skoda Rapid, which means Chevrolet Cruze can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`823 | 1`615 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 6000 | 6000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Cruze has
|
Skoda Rapid has
| |