Skoda Roomster 2006 vs Skoda Yeti 2009
| Body: | Estate car / wagon | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 86 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 132 NM | 175 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13 seconds | 11.8 seconds | |
|
Skoda Yeti is a more dynamic driving. Skoda Roomster engine produces 19 HP less power than Skoda Yeti, whereas torque is 43 NM less than Skoda Yeti. Due to the lower power, Skoda Roomster reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.8 | 6.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km | |
|
By specification Skoda Roomster consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Yeti, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Skoda Roomster could require 30 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Skoda Roomster consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Yeti. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 770 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| Skoda Yeti gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Skoda Yeti 2009 1.2 engine: Although the engine has a chain, its lifetime is relatively short. Vibration at idling speed tends to be excessive. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.20 m | 4.22 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.61 m | 1.69 m | |
|
Skoda Roomster is smaller. Skoda Roomster is 2 cm shorter than the Skoda Yeti, 11 cm narrower, while the height of Skoda Roomster is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 450 litres | 405 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1780 litres | no data | |
|
Skoda Roomster has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Skoda Roomster has 45 litres more trunk space than the Skoda Yeti. The Skoda Yeti may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Roomster is 0.2 metres more than that of the Skoda Yeti. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`670 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Skoda Yeti has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Skoda Roomster has serious deffects in 95 percent more cases than Skoda Yeti, so Skoda Yeti quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2200 | 6600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Roomster has
|
Skoda Yeti has
| |