Mitsubishi Colt 2007 vs Ford Fiesta 2005
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 95 HP | 70 HP | |
| Torque: | 125 NM | 106 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.8 seconds | 17.3 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 25 HP more power than Ford Fiesta, whereas torque is 19 NM more than Ford Fiesta. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 5.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 6.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.8 l/100km | 6.8 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Fiesta, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Colt over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 730 km in combined cycle | |
| 690 km with real consumption | 660 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Colt gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 420'000 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 Ford Fiesta engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 21 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Smart ForFour | Used also on Ford KA | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Ford Fiesta 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: | 3.81 m | 3.92 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.46 m | |
| Mitsubishi Colt is 11 cm shorter than the Ford Fiesta, 2 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | 284 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
400 litres | no data | |
|
Ford Fiesta has more luggage space. Mitsubishi Colt has 64 litres less trunk space than the Ford Fiesta. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 1 metres more than that of the Ford Fiesta, which means Mitsubishi Colt can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`435 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Ford Fiesta has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mitsubishi Colt, so Ford Fiesta quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | no data | 1400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.8/10 | 7.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Ford Fiesta has
| |