Hyundai Tucson 2004 vs Skoda Yeti 2009
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.2 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Hyundai Tucson) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Skoda Yeti) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
| 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: | 112 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 245 NM | 175 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.8 seconds | 11.8 seconds | |
| Hyundai Tucson engine produces 7 HP more power than Skoda Yeti, whereas torque is 70 NM more than Skoda Yeti. Despite the higher power, Hyundai Tucson reaches 100 km/h speed 2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 6.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Yeti is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Hyundai Tucson consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Yeti, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Hyundai Tucson could require 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Hyundai Tucson consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Yeti. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| Skoda Yeti 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: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Hyundai Santa FE, Kia Sportage, Kia Ceed, Hyundai Sonata | Installed on at least 14 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Polo, Skoda Fabia, Seat Altea | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Skoda Yeti 2009 1.2 engine: Although the engine has a chain, its lifetime is relatively short. Vibration at idling speed tends to be excessive. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.32 m | 4.22 m | |
| Width: | 1.83 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.73 m | 1.69 m | |
|
Hyundai Tucson is larger. Hyundai Tucson is 10 cm longer than the Skoda Yeti, 4 cm wider, while the height of Hyundai Tucson is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 644 litres | 405 litres | |
|
Hyundai Tucson has more luggage capacity. Hyundai Tucson has 239 litres more trunk space than the Skoda Yeti. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Hyundai Tucson is 0.5 metres more than that of the Skoda Yeti, which means Hyundai Tucson can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`210 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Skoda Yeti has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Hyundai Tucson has serious deffects in 160 percent more cases than Skoda Yeti, so Skoda Yeti quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3600 | 6600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.4/10 | 8.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Hyundai Tucson has
|
Skoda Yeti has
| |