Mitsubishi Colt 2008 vs Suzuki Splash 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 95 HP | 94 HP | |
| Torque: | 125 NM | 114 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 1 HP more power than Suzuki Splash, whereas torque is 11 NM more than Suzuki Splash. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 5.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.5 l/100km | 6.1 l/100km | |
|
The Suzuki Splash is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Splash, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Colt could require 105 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Splash. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 970 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
| Suzuki Splash gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 390'000 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 Suzuki Splash engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Smart ForFour | Used also on Opel Agila | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.88 m | 3.72 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.59 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is larger, but lower. Mitsubishi Colt is 17 cm longer than the Suzuki Splash, 2 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | 178 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1050 litres | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt has more luggage capacity. Mitsubishi Colt has 42 litres more trunk space than the Suzuki Splash. | |||
| 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 Splash, which means Mitsubishi Colt can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Electric power steering | Hydraulic power steering | |
| Electric power steering is simpler, quieter, more fuel-efficient, more configurable and provides additional features such as auto-steering for lane assist and parking. The disadvantages of electric power steering are possible overheating under prolonged load conditions and insufficient feedback (feeling) during steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`430 | 1`485 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Suzuki Splash has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Colt has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Suzuki Splash, so Suzuki Splash quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3000 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Suzuki Splash has
| |