Kia Ceed 2010 vs Alfa Romeo MiTo 2008
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Kia Ceed) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Alfa Romeo MiTo) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 143 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 186 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
Alfa Romeo MiTo is a more dynamic driving. Kia Ceed engine produces 23 HP more power than Alfa Romeo MiTo, but torque is 134 NM less than Alfa Romeo MiTo. Despite the higher power, Kia Ceed reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 4.9 | |
|
The Alfa Romeo MiTo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Kia Ceed consumes 2.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Alfa Romeo MiTo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Kia Ceed could require 405 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 53 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 910 km in combined cycle | |
| 850 km on highway | 1090 km on highway | ||
| Alfa Romeo MiTo 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: | 400'000 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 Kia Ceed engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Kia Sportage, Hyundai Sonata, Hyundai Tucson, Hyundai Elantra | Used also on Fiat Grande Punto | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Alfa Romeo MiTo 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. | |||
| Kia Ceed 2010 2.0 engine: Relatively reliable engine with a large resource. Can have inherent vibrations and is noisier than a typical petrol engine. Spare parts widely available. May have problems with ignition system and temperature ... More about Kia Ceed 2010 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.26 m | 4.06 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.43 m | |
|
Kia Ceed is larger. Kia Ceed is 20 cm longer than the Alfa Romeo MiTo, 7 cm wider, while the height of Kia Ceed is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 340 litres | 270 litres | |
|
Kia Ceed has more luggage capacity. Kia Ceed has 70 litres more trunk space than the Alfa Romeo MiTo. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Kia Ceed is 0.7 metres less than that of the Alfa Romeo MiTo, which means Kia Ceed can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`780 | 1`685 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Kia Ceed has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Alfa Romeo MiTo has serious deffects in 65 percent more cases than Kia Ceed, so Kia Ceed quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2400 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Kia Ceed has
|
Alfa Romeo MiTo has
| |