Ford EcoSport 2013 vs Suzuki Vitara 2015
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 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: | 125 HP | 117 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 156 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.7 seconds | 12 seconds | |
| Ford EcoSport engine produces 8 HP more power than Suzuki Vitara, whereas torque is 14 NM more than Suzuki Vitara. Despite the higher power, Ford EcoSport reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.3 | 5.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
By specification Ford EcoSport consumes 0.3 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 45 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Ford EcoSport consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Vitara. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 980 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 1100 km on highway | 920 km on highway | ||
| 730 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford EcoSport gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 180 mm (7.1 inches) | 185 mm (7.3 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 24 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Suzuki Grand Vitara, Suzuki Swift, Suzuki SX4, Suzuki Liana | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Suzuki Vitara might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Suzuki Vitara 2015 1.6 engine: A simple and robust engine, not particularly demanding in terms of fuel quality.
High engine timing chain lifetime.
Tends to increase oil consumption, head gasket failures may occur. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.27 m | 4.18 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.65 m | 1.61 m | |
| Ford EcoSport is 10 cm longer than the Suzuki Vitara, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Ford EcoSport is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 333 litres | 375 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1238 litres | 710 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Ford EcoSport has 42 litres less trunk space than the Suzuki Vitara. This could mean that the Ford EcoSport uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford EcoSport (by 528 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`715 | 1`730 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Suzuki Vitara scores higher in safety tests. The Suzuki Vitara scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Suzuki Vitara has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford EcoSport has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Suzuki Vitara, so Suzuki Vitara quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7800 | 11 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford EcoSport has
|
Suzuki Vitara has
| |