Renault Captur 2012 vs Skoda Yeti 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 120 HP | 122 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
Skoda Yeti is a more dynamic driving. Renault Captur engine produces 2 HP less power than Skoda Yeti, whereas torque is 10 NM less than Skoda Yeti. Due to the lower power, Renault Captur reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 6.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Captur is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Captur consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Yeti, which means that by driving the Renault Captur over 15,000 km in a year you can save 180 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Captur consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Yeti. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 1050 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
| Skoda Yeti gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Renault Scenic, Renault Megane, Dacia Duster, Dacia Dokker | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Skoda Yeti might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Skoda Yeti 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. | |||
| Skoda Yeti 2013 1.4 engine: The engine is prone to increased vibration at idle. The engine is also very demanding on fuel quality. The timing chain has a low life expectancy and must be monitored. Turbine problems are also common. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.12 m | 4.22 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.57 m | 1.69 m | |
|
Renault Captur is smaller. Renault Captur is 10 cm shorter than the Skoda Yeti, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Captur is 12 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 377 litres | 405 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1235 litres | no data | |
|
Skoda Yeti has more luggage space. Renault Captur has 28 litres less trunk space than the Skoda Yeti. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Captur is 0.1 metres more than that of the Skoda Yeti. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`726 | 1`955 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Renault Captur has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Skoda Yeti has serious deffects in 55 percent more cases than Renault Captur, so Renault Captur quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7600 | 7200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Captur has
|
Skoda Yeti has
| |