Mitsubishi Colt 2008 vs Suzuki Swift 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.1 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 92 HP | |
| Torque: | 100 NM | 116 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.8 seconds | 12.8 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 17 HP less power than Suzuki Swift, whereas torque is 16 NM less than Suzuki Swift. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.1 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Swift, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Colt over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Swift. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 850 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 1020 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 770 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Colt gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 19 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Smart ForFour | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Suzuki Liana, Suzuki Wagon R+, Suzuki Ignis, Suzuki Jimny | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Suzuki Swift might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.88 m | 3.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.54 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is larger, but slightly lower. Mitsubishi Colt is 18 cm longer than the Suzuki Swift, width is practically the same , while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | 198 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 562 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt has more luggage capacity. Mitsubishi Colt has 22 litres more trunk space than the Suzuki Swift. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 9.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 1.4 metres more than that of the Suzuki Swift, which means Mitsubishi Colt can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`450 | 1`485 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | low | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Suzuki Swift 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: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Suzuki Swift has
| |