Seat Alhambra 2010 vs Volkswagen Sharan 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
|
Seat Alhambra is more dynamic to drive. Seat Alhambra engine produces 30 HP more power than Volkswagen Sharan, whereas torque is 30 NM more than Volkswagen Sharan. Thanks to more power Seat Alhambra reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Sharan is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Seat Alhambra consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Sharan, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Seat Alhambra could require 45 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Seat Alhambra consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Sharan. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1200 km in combined cycle | 1270 km in combined cycle | |
| 1400 km on highway | 1450 km on highway | ||
| 950 km with real consumption | 980 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Sharan gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 390'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Sharan, Audi A3, Skoda Superb | Installed on at least 12 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Audi A3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Sharan might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Volkswagen Sharan 2010 2.0 engine: The engine is very durable and can last a long time with proper maintenance, and is also quite economical for its power. There may be some problems with the turbine geometry. It is important to use good ... More about Volkswagen Sharan 2010 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.85 m | 4.85 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.74 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Seat Alhambra and Volkswagen Sharan are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 267 litres | 809 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Sharan has more luggage space. Seat Alhambra has 542 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Sharan. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`360 | 2`340 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | low | |
| Seat Alhambra has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Volkswagen Sharan, so Seat Alhambra quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 800 | 13 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Seat Alhambra has
|
Volkswagen Sharan has
| |