Skoda Citigo 2017 vs Mitsubishi Space Star 2016
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 60 HP | 80 HP | |
| Torque: | 95 NM | 106 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.4 seconds | 12.8 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Space Star is a more dynamic driving. Skoda Citigo engine produces 20 HP less power than Mitsubishi Space Star, whereas torque is 11 NM less than Mitsubishi Space Star. Due to the lower power, Skoda Citigo reaches 100 km/h speed 1.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.1 | 4.1 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 35 litres | 35 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 850 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 940 km on highway | 920 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.56 m | 3.80 m | |
| Width: | 1.65 m | 1.67 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.51 m | |
|
Skoda Citigo is smaller. Skoda Citigo is 23 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Space Star, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Skoda Citigo is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 251 litres | 235 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 912 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Skoda Citigo has 16 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Space Star. The Mitsubishi Space Star may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 9.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Citigo is 0.6 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Space Star, which means Skoda Citigo can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`290 | 1`370 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 8400 | 6800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Citigo has
|
Mitsubishi Space Star has
| |