Seat Alhambra 2000 vs Mercedes Vito 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 2.1 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 88 HP | |
| Torque: | 310 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.7 seconds | 19.4 seconds | |
|
Seat Alhambra is more dynamic to drive. Seat Alhambra engine produces 27 HP more power than Mercedes Vito, whereas torque is 90 NM more than Mercedes Vito. Thanks to more power Seat Alhambra reaches 100 km/h speed 5.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.3 | no data | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 75 litres | |
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Seat Alhambra) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Mercedes Vito) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.63 m | no data | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | no data | |
| Height: | 1.76 m | no data | |
| Trunk capacity: | 256 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2200 | 3600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Seat Alhambra has
|
| |