Skoda Citigo 2017 vs Mitsubishi Space Star 2016
Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
---|---|---|---|
Engine: | 1.0 LPG | 1.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 68 HP | 71 HP | |
Torque: | 900 NM | 88 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 16.3 seconds | 13.6 seconds | |
Mitsubishi Space Star is a more dynamic driving. Skoda Citigo engine produces 3 HP less power than Mitsubishi Space Star, but torque is 812 NM more than Mitsubishi Space Star. Due to the lower power, Skoda Citigo reaches 100 km/h speed 2.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.5 | 4.2 | |
The Mitsubishi Space Star is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Skoda Citigo consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Space Star, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Skoda Citigo could require 45 litres more fuel. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 12 litres | 35 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 260 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
300 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
Mitsubishi Space Star gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
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: | 213 litres | 235 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 912 litres | |
Mitsubishi Space Star has more luggage space. Skoda Citigo has 22 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Space Star. | |||
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`370 | 1`290 | |
Safety: | no data | ||
Quality: | below average | no data | |
Average price (€): | 8400 | 6800 | |
Pros and Cons: |
|
Mitsubishi Space Star has
| |