Skoda Roomster 2010 vs Citroen Berlingo 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 98 HP | |
| Torque: | 175 NM | 152 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 13.8 seconds | |
|
Skoda Roomster is more dynamic to drive. Skoda Roomster engine produces 7 HP more power than Citroen Berlingo, whereas torque is 23 NM more than Citroen Berlingo. Thanks to more power Skoda Roomster reaches 100 km/h speed 2.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.7 | 7.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 7.7 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Roomster is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Skoda Roomster consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Berlingo, which means that by driving the Skoda Roomster over 15,000 km in a year you can save 210 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Skoda Roomster consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Berlingo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 960 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 1140 km on highway | 1050 km on highway | ||
| 790 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
| Skoda Roomster 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: | 330'000 km | 330'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 14 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Polo, Skoda Fabia, Seat Altea, Skoda Yeti | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Skoda Roomster might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Skoda Roomster 2010 1.2 engine: Although the engine has a chain, its lifetime is relatively short. Vibration at idling speed tends to be excessive. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.21 m | 4.38 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.61 m | 1.80 m | |
|
Skoda Roomster is smaller. Skoda Roomster is 17 cm shorter than the Citroen Berlingo, 13 cm narrower, while the height of Skoda Roomster is 19 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 480 litres | 675 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 3000 litres | |
|
Citroen Berlingo has more luggage space. Skoda Roomster has 195 litres less trunk space than the Citroen Berlingo. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Roomster is 0.5 metres less than that of the Citroen Berlingo, which means Skoda Roomster can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`692 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Skoda Roomster has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen Berlingo has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Skoda Roomster, so Skoda Roomster quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3600 | 4400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Roomster has
|
Citroen Berlingo has
| |