Skoda Rapid 2012 vs Honda Civic 2017
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 1.5 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Skoda Rapid) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Honda Civic) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 182 HP | |
| Torque: | 250 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 8.2 seconds | |
|
Honda Civic is a more dynamic driving. Skoda Rapid engine produces 77 HP less power than Honda Civic, but torque is 30 NM more than Honda Civic. Due to the lower power, Skoda Rapid reaches 100 km/h speed 2.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.3 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.2 l/100km | 7.1 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 Honda Civic, 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 1.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda Civic. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 46 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1270 km in combined cycle | 790 km in combined cycle | |
| 1480 km on highway | 930 km on highway | ||
| 1050 km with real consumption | 640 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. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 136 mm (5.4 inches) | 129 mm (5.1 inches) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.52 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.43 m | |
|
Skoda Rapid is smaller, but slightly higher. Skoda Rapid is 4 cm shorter than the Honda Civic, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Skoda Rapid is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 420 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1490 litres | 1209 litres | |
|
Skoda Rapid has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, The Honda Civic may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Skoda Rapid (by 281 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Rapid is 1.2 metres less than that of the Honda Civic, which means Skoda Rapid can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`725 kg | 1`790 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`265 kg | 1`232 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 460 kg | 558 kg | |
| Skoda Rapid load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 21 procentiem less than Honda Civic. Therefore, Honda Civic is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | |||
| Skoda Rapid is better rated in child safety tests. The Honda Civic scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Skoda Rapid has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Honda Civic has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Skoda Rapid, so Skoda Rapid quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6000 | 30 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Rapid has
|
Honda Civic has
| |