Hyundai Getz 2002 vs Mitsubishi Colt 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.3 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: | 82 HP | 95 HP | |
| Torque: | 119 NM | 125 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.5 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is a more dynamic driving. Hyundai Getz engine produces 13 HP less power than Mitsubishi Colt, whereas torque is 6 NM less than Mitsubishi Colt. Due to the lower power, Hyundai Getz reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.1 | 6.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 6.4 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Hyundai Getz consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Hyundai Getz could require 15 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Hyundai Getz consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 940 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Colt gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 21 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Hyundai Accent | Used also on Smart ForFour | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Colt might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Hyundai Getz 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: | 3.81 m | 3.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.49 m | 1.52 m | |
| Hyundai Getz and Mitsubishi Colt are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 254 litres | 155 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
977 litres | 760 litres | |
|
Hyundai Getz has more luggage capacity. Hyundai Getz has 99 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Colt. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Hyundai Getz (by 217 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Hyundai Getz is 0.8 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Colt, which means Hyundai Getz can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`500 | 1`435 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Hyundai Getz has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.6/10 | 8.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Hyundai Getz has
|
Mitsubishi Colt has
| |