Skoda Rapid 2012 vs Chevrolet Cruze 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 86 HP | 141 HP | |
| Torque: | 160 NM | 176 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.8 seconds | 10.1 seconds | |
|
Chevrolet Cruze is a more dynamic driving. Skoda Rapid engine produces 55 HP less power than Chevrolet Cruze, whereas torque is 16 NM less than Chevrolet Cruze. Due to the lower power, Skoda Rapid reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 | 6.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.2 l/100km | 7.7 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Rapid is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Skoda Rapid consumes 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Cruze, which means that by driving the Skoda Rapid over 15,000 km in a year you can save 225 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Skoda Rapid consumes 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Cruze. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1070 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
| Skoda Rapid gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 480'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Chevrolet Cruze engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Volkswagen Caddy, Skoda Fabia, Audi A1 | Used also on Chevrolet Orlando | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Skoda Rapid engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| Skoda Rapid 2012 1.2 engine: Although the engine has a chain, its lifespan is relatively low. There tends to be increased vibration at idling speed. Problems with the fuel pressure pump may be the first sign of a petrol smell in the oil. ... More about Skoda Rapid 2012 1.2 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Skoda Rapid is smaller. Skoda Rapid is 3 cm shorter than the Chevrolet Cruze, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Skoda Rapid is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 413 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1490 litres | no data | |
|
Skoda Rapid has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Skoda Rapid has 137 litres more trunk space than the Chevrolet Cruze. The Chevrolet Cruze may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Rapid is 0.7 metres less than that of the Chevrolet Cruze, which means Skoda Rapid can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`615 | 1`823 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Average price (€): | 6200 | 6200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Rapid has
|
Chevrolet Cruze has
| |