Skoda Yeti 2013 vs Ford EcoSport 2015
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 95 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 215 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 seconds | 14 seconds | |
|
Skoda Yeti is more dynamic to drive. Skoda Yeti engine produces 45 HP more power than Ford EcoSport, whereas torque is 105 NM more than Ford EcoSport. Thanks to more power Skoda Yeti reaches 100 km/h speed 3.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.3 | 4.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 6.1 l/100km | |
|
The Ford EcoSport is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Skoda Yeti consumes 1.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford EcoSport, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Skoda Yeti could require 285 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Skoda Yeti consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford EcoSport. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 52 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 950 km in combined cycle | 1180 km in combined cycle | |
| 1090 km on highway | 1200 km on highway | ||
| 840 km with real consumption | 850 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford EcoSport 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: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.22 m | 4.27 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.69 m | 1.65 m | |
| Skoda Yeti is 5 cm shorter than the Ford EcoSport, 3 cm wider, while the height of Skoda Yeti is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 322 litres | 333 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1238 litres | |
| Skoda Yeti has 11 litres less trunk space than the Ford EcoSport. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Yeti is 0.6 metres less than that of the Ford EcoSport, which means Skoda Yeti can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`130 | 1`760 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Ford EcoSport has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Skoda Yeti has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Ford EcoSport, so Ford EcoSport quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7200 | 9200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Yeti has
|
Ford EcoSport has
| |