Skoda Yeti 2013 vs Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 2.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 122 HP | 169 HP | |
| Torque: | 200 NM | 227 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 12 seconds | |
| Skoda Yeti engine produces 47 HP less power than Suzuki Grand Vitara, whereas torque is 27 NM less than Suzuki Grand Vitara. Despite less power, Skoda Yeti reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 9.7 | |
|
The Skoda Yeti is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Skoda Yeti consumes 3.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Grand Vitara, which means that by driving the Skoda Yeti over 15,000 km in a year you can save 465 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 66 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 900 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 1050 km on highway | 810 km on highway | ||
| 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 | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 17 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3 | 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Skoda Yeti 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 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 | 4.30 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.69 m | 1.70 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Skoda Yeti is 8 cm shorter than the Suzuki Grand Vitara, 2 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 405 litres | 398 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 758 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Skoda Yeti has 7 litres more trunk space than the Suzuki Grand Vitara. The Suzuki Grand Vitara may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Yeti is 0.7 metres less than that of the Suzuki Grand Vitara, which means Skoda Yeti can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`955 | 2`100 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | low | |
| Skoda Yeti has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Suzuki Grand Vitara has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Skoda Yeti, so Skoda Yeti quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7200 | 5600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Yeti has
|
Suzuki Grand Vitara has
| |