Skoda Octavia 2009 vs Volkswagen Passat 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 102 HP | 122 HP | |
| Torque: | 148 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.4 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Passat is a more dynamic driving. Skoda Octavia engine produces 20 HP less power than Volkswagen Passat, whereas torque is 52 NM less than Volkswagen Passat. Due to the lower power, Skoda Octavia reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 | 6.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Passat is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Skoda Octavia consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Passat, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Skoda Octavia could require 195 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Skoda Octavia consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Passat. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 1140 km in combined cycle | |
| 940 km on highway | 1400 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 970 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Passat gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Seat Altea, Seat Leon | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3, Skoda Yeti | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Passat might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Volkswagen Passat 2010 1.4 engine: The engine is prone to increased vibration at idle. The engine is also very demanding on fuel quality. The timing chain has a low life expectancy and must be monitored. Turbine problems are also common. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.57 m | 4.77 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.52 m | |
|
Skoda Octavia is smaller. Skoda Octavia is 20 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Passat, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Skoda Octavia is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 580 litres | 603 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1630 litres | no data | |
|
Volkswagen Passat has more luggage space. Skoda Octavia has 23 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Passat. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Octavia is 1.2 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Passat, which means Skoda Octavia can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`910 | 2`090 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | low | |
| Skoda Octavia has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Passat has serious deffects in 90 percent more cases than Skoda Octavia, so Skoda Octavia quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4200 | 4800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Octavia has
|
Volkswagen Passat has
| |