Skoda Yeti 2013 vs Chevrolet Trax 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 122 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 200 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Chevrolet Trax is a more dynamic driving. Skoda Yeti engine produces 18 HP less power than Chevrolet Trax, the torque is the same for both cars. Due to the lower power, Skoda Yeti reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 6.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 7.9 l/100km | |
|
By specification Skoda Yeti consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Trax, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Skoda Yeti could require 30 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Skoda Yeti consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Trax. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 53 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 900 km in combined cycle | 820 km in combined cycle | |
| 1050 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 740 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
| Skoda Yeti gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3 | Used also on Chevrolet Cruze | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Skoda Yeti might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Skoda Yeti 2013 1.4 engine: The engine is prone to increased vibration at idle. The engine is also very demanding on fuel quality. The timing chain has a low life expectancy and must be monitored. Turbine problems are also common. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.22 m | 4.25 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.69 m | 1.67 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Skoda Yeti is 3 cm shorter than the Chevrolet Trax, 2 cm wider, while the height of Skoda Yeti is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 405 litres | 356 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1665 litres | 785 litres | |
|
Skoda Yeti has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, The Chevrolet Trax 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 Yeti (by 880 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Yeti is 0.6 metres less than that of the Chevrolet Trax, which means Skoda Yeti can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`955 kg | 1`884 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`305 kg | 1`380 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 650 kg | 504 kg | |
| Skoda Yeti load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 22 procentiem more than Chevrolet Trax. Therefore, Skoda Yeti is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 7000 | 6400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Yeti has
|
Chevrolet Trax has
| |