Mitsubishi Colt 2005 vs Hyundai Getz 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.6 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: | 109 HP | 106 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 144 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 3 HP more power than Hyundai Getz, whereas torque is 1 NM more than Hyundai Getz. Despite the higher power, Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.2 | 6.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.7 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Hyundai Getz, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Colt could require 15 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, 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: | 750 km in combined cycle | 730 km in combined cycle | |
| 920 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 590 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Smart ForFour, Mitsubishi Xpander | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Hyundai Elantra, Hyundai Accent, Kia RIO, Kia Cerato | |
| 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: | 3.81 m | 3.82 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.49 m | |
| Mitsubishi Colt is 1 cm shorter than the Hyundai Getz, 4 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 3 cm higher. | |||
| 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. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`440 | 1`530 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| 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 (€): | 1400 | 1200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.2/10 | 7.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Hyundai Getz has
| |