Skoda Yeti 2009 vs Suzuki SX4 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 107 HP | |
| Torque: | 175 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.8 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Suzuki SX4 is a more dynamic driving. Skoda Yeti engine produces 2 HP less power than Suzuki SX4, but torque is 30 NM more than Suzuki SX4. Due to the lower power, Skoda Yeti reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 7.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.2 l/100km | 7.9 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Yeti is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Skoda Yeti consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki SX4, which means that by driving the Skoda Yeti over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Skoda Yeti consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki SX4. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 900 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 760 km on highway | ||
| 830 km with real consumption | 630 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 | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 24 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 14 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Polo, Skoda Fabia, Seat Altea | 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 2009 1.2 engine: Although the engine has a chain, its lifetime is relatively short. Vibration at idling speed tends to be excessive. Suzuki SX4 2006 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 | 4.16 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.69 m | 1.62 m | |
|
Skoda Yeti is larger. Skoda Yeti is 6 cm longer than the Suzuki SX4, 3 cm wider, while the height of Skoda Yeti is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 405 litres | 270 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1045 litres | |
|
Skoda Yeti has more luggage capacity. Skoda Yeti has 135 litres more trunk space than the Suzuki SX4. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Yeti is 0.3 metres less than that of the Suzuki SX4. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`670 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Skoda Yeti has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Suzuki SX4 has serious deffects in 115 percent more cases than Skoda Yeti, so Skoda Yeti quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6600 | 3200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Yeti has
|
Suzuki SX4 has
| |