Ford EcoSport 2017 vs Suzuki Vitara 2014
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 1.4 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: | 125 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.7 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Suzuki Vitara is a more dynamic driving. Ford EcoSport engine produces 15 HP less power than Suzuki Vitara, whereas torque is 50 NM less than Suzuki Vitara. Due to the lower power, Ford EcoSport reaches 100 km/h speed 2.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.2 | 5.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.0 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
By specification Ford EcoSport consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Vitara, which means that by driving the Ford EcoSport over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Ford EcoSport consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Vitara. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 870 km in combined cycle | |
| 1130 km on highway | 940 km on highway | ||
| 740 km with real consumption | 680 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) | |
| Ground clearance: | 190 mm (7.5 inches) | 185 mm (7.3 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 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 Suzuki Vitara engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Ford Focus, Ford Mondeo, Ford C-Max | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Suzuki SX4, Suzuki Swift | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Ford EcoSport might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Suzuki Vitara 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: | 4.10 m | 4.18 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.65 m | 1.61 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Ford EcoSport is 8 cm shorter than the Suzuki Vitara, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Ford EcoSport is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 334 litres | 375 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1238 litres | 1120 litres | |
| Ford EcoSport has 41 litres less trunk space than the Suzuki Vitara. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford EcoSport (by 118 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford EcoSport is 0.2 metres more than that of the Suzuki Vitara. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`730 | 1`730 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Suzuki Vitara has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford EcoSport has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Suzuki Vitara, so Suzuki Vitara quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 14 600 | 14 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford EcoSport has
|
Suzuki Vitara has
| |