Mitsubishi Colt 2005 vs Hyundai Getz 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.3 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 | 82 HP | |
| Torque: | 125 NM | 119 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 13 HP more power than Hyundai Getz, whereas torque is 6 NM more than Hyundai Getz. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 6.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.4 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.1 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 15 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Hyundai Getz. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 780 km in combined cycle | 730 km in combined cycle | |
| 940 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
| 730 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Colt gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Smart ForFour | Used also on Hyundai Accent | |
| 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 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: | 3.81 m | 3.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.49 m | |
| Mitsubishi Colt and Hyundai Getz are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 155 litres | 254 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
760 litres | 977 litres | |
|
Hyundai Getz has more luggage space. Mitsubishi Colt has 99 litres less trunk space than the Hyundai Getz. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Hyundai Getz (by 217 litres). | |||
| 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. | |||
| 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`435 | 1`500 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | high | above 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 (€): | 1600 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.2/10 | 8.6/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Hyundai Getz has
| |