Mitsubishi Colt 2008 vs Hyundai Getz 2005
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 95 HP | 97 HP | |
| Torque: | 125 NM | 125 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.8 seconds | 13.9 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 2 HP less power than Hyundai Getz, the torque is the same for both cars. Despite less power, Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 2.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 6.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.3 l/100km | 7.8 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 Hyundai Getz, 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 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Hyundai Getz. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 940 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| 740 km with real consumption | 570 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Colt gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 21 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Smart ForFour | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Hyundai Accent, Kia RIO | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Hyundai Getz 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.88 m | 3.82 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.49 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mitsubishi Colt is 6 cm longer than the Hyundai Getz, 4 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | 254 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 977 litres | |
|
Hyundai Getz has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mitsubishi Colt has 34 litres less trunk space than the Hyundai Getz. This could mean that the Mitsubishi Colt uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 0.8 metres more than that of the Hyundai Getz, which means Mitsubishi Colt can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`435 | 1`420 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Hyundai Getz has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2800 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Hyundai Getz has
| |