Skoda Yeti 2013 vs Suzuki SX4 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 122 HP | 117 HP | |
| Torque: | 200 NM | 156 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Skoda Yeti is more dynamic to drive. Skoda Yeti engine produces 5 HP more power than Suzuki SX4, whereas torque is 44 NM more than Suzuki SX4. Thanks to more power Skoda Yeti reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 5.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Suzuki SX4 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Skoda Yeti consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki SX4, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Skoda Yeti could require 180 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Skoda Yeti consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki SX4. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 900 km in combined cycle | 870 km in combined cycle | |
| 1050 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 740 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 25 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3 | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Suzuki Grand Vitara, Suzuki Swift, Suzuki Liana, Suzuki Vitara | |
| 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. Suzuki SX4 2013 1.6 engine: A simple and robust engine, not particularly demanding in terms of fuel quality. High engine timing chain lifetime. Tends to increase oil consumption, head gasket failures may occur. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.22 m | 4.30 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.69 m | 1.59 m | |
| Skoda Yeti is 8 cm shorter than the Suzuki SX4, 3 cm wider, while the height of Skoda Yeti is 10 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 405 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1665 litres | 1269 litres | |
| Skoda Yeti has 25 litres less trunk space than the Suzuki SX4. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Skoda Yeti (by 396 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Yeti is 0.1 metres less than that of the Suzuki SX4. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`955 kg | 1`740 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`305 kg | 1`085 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 650 kg | 655 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Suzuki SX4 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Skoda Yeti has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Suzuki SX4, so Suzuki SX4 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7000 | 6600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Suzuki SX4 has
| |