Mitsubishi Colt 2007 vs Volkswagen EOS 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Mitsubishi Colt) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Volkswagen EOS) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 109 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 31 HP less power than Volkswagen EOS, whereas torque is 175 NM less than Volkswagen EOS. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 6.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.0 l/100km | 6.2 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen EOS is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen EOS, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Colt could require 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen EOS. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 870 km on highway | 1100 km on highway | ||
| 670 km with real consumption | 880 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen EOS gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.88 m | 4.41 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is smaller, but slightly higher. Mitsubishi Colt is 54 cm shorter than the Volkswagen EOS, 10 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 190 litres | 205 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 380 litres | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has 15 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen EOS. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 0.1 metres less than that of the Volkswagen EOS. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`010 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Volkswagen EOS has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Colt has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Volkswagen EOS, so Volkswagen EOS quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3000 | 4600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Volkswagen EOS has
| |