Kia Ceed 2010 vs Mitsubishi Colt 2008
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 126 HP | 109 HP | |
| Torque: | 157 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.4 seconds | 10 seconds | |
| Kia Ceed engine produces 17 HP more power than Mitsubishi Colt, whereas torque is 12 NM more than Mitsubishi Colt. Despite the higher power, Kia Ceed reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 6.2 | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Kia Ceed consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Kia Ceed could require 60 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 53 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 920 km on highway | 920 km on highway | ||
| Kia Ceed gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 310'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 19 years | 21 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Hyundai Elantra, Hyundai i30, Hyundai Accent, Kia RIO | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Smart ForFour, Mitsubishi Xpander | |
| 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. | |||
| Kia Ceed 2010 1.6 engine: Overall, the engine is reliable and not very demanding on fuel quality. Fuel injectors tend to be noisy. Timing chain resource is relatively low. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.26 m | 3.94 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.55 m | |
|
Kia Ceed is larger, but lower. Kia Ceed is 32 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Colt, 10 cm wider, while the height of Kia Ceed is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 340 litres | 220 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1032 litres | |
|
Kia Ceed has more luggage capacity. Kia Ceed has 120 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Kia Ceed is 0.5 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Colt, which means Kia Ceed can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`770 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Kia Ceed has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3000 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Kia Ceed has
|
Mitsubishi Colt has
| |