Skoda Rapid 2012 vs Ford Focus 2014
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.0 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 | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 160 NM | 170 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.8 seconds | 12.5 seconds | |
| Skoda Rapid engine produces 14 HP less power than Ford Focus, whereas torque is 10 NM less than Ford Focus. Despite less power, Skoda Rapid reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 | 4.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.2 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
By specification Skoda Rapid consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Focus, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Skoda Rapid could require 75 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Skoda Rapid consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Focus. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1070 km in combined cycle | 1190 km in combined cycle | |
| 1240 km on highway | 1410 km on highway | ||
| 880 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Volkswagen Caddy, Skoda Fabia, Audi A1 | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Ford C-Max, Ford Fiesta, Ford Tourneo, Ford B-Max | |
| 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 | 4.36 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.86 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.48 m | |
| Skoda Rapid is 12 cm longer than the Ford Focus, 15 cm narrower, while the height of Skoda Rapid is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 362 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1490 litres | 1062 litres | |
|
Skoda Rapid has more luggage capacity. Skoda Rapid has 188 litres more trunk space than the Ford Focus. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Skoda Rapid (by 428 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Rapid is 0.8 metres less than that of the Ford Focus, which means Skoda Rapid can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`615 | 1`900 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | low | |
| Skoda Rapid has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Focus has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Skoda Rapid, so Skoda Rapid quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6200 | 6400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Rapid has
|
Ford Focus has
| |