Skoda Citigo 2017 vs Mitsubishi Space Star 2016
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 1.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 71 HP | |
| Torque: | 95 NM | 88 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.9 seconds | 13.6 seconds | |
| Skoda Citigo engine produces 4 HP more power than Mitsubishi Space Star, whereas torque is 7 NM more than Mitsubishi Space Star. Despite the higher power, Skoda Citigo reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.2 | 4.2 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 35 litres | 35 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 920 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 670 km with real consumption | 700 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: | no data | 9.2 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`300 | 1`290 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 8400 | 6800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Citigo has
|
Mitsubishi Space Star has
| |