Fiat Bravo 2010 vs Kia Ceed 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.6 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: | 120 HP | 135 HP | |
| Torque: | 206 NM | 164 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 10.8 seconds | |
|
Fiat Bravo is more dynamic to drive. Fiat Bravo engine produces 15 HP less power than Kia Ceed, but torque is 42 NM more than Kia Ceed. Despite less power, Fiat Bravo reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.3 | 6.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.7 l/100km | 7.9 l/100km | |
|
By specification Fiat Bravo consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Kia Ceed, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Fiat Bravo could require 45 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Fiat Bravo consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Kia Ceed. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 53 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 920 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 1110 km on highway | 1100 km on highway | ||
| 750 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 420'000 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 Kia Ceed engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Fiat Grande Punto, Alfa Romeo Giulietta, Alfa Romeo MiTo | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Kia Sportage, Hyundai Tucson, Hyundai Elantra, Hyundai i30 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Kia Ceed might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Fiat Bravo 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. | |||
| Kia Ceed 2012 1.6 engine: The engine is generally a reliable design and not particularly sensitive to fuel quality. However, it is prone to several common issues. One of the most widespread problems is the rapid buildup of carbon ... More about Kia Ceed 2012 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.34 m | 4.31 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.50 m | 1.47 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Fiat Bravo is 3 cm longer than the Kia Ceed, 1 cm wider, while the height of Fiat Bravo is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 400 litres | 380 litres | |
| Fiat Bravo has 20 litres more trunk space than the Kia Ceed. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Fiat Bravo is 0.2 metres less than that of the Kia Ceed. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`785 | 1`870 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Kia Ceed has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Fiat Bravo has serious deffects in 100 percent more cases than Kia Ceed, so Kia Ceed quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4600 | 5400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Fiat Bravo has
|
Kia Ceed has
| |