Suzuki Baleno 1995 vs Opel Omega 1995
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 96 HP | 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 134 NM | 175 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.2 seconds | 14 seconds | |
| Suzuki Baleno engine produces 20 HP less power than Opel Omega, whereas torque is 41 NM less than Opel Omega. Despite less power, Suzuki Baleno reaches 100 km/h speed 2.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.5 | 9.2 | |
|
The Suzuki Baleno is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Suzuki Baleno consumes 1.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Omega, which means that by driving the Suzuki Baleno over 15,000 km in a year you can save 255 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 810 km in combined cycle | |
| 820 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| Opel Omega gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Suzuki Baleno) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Opel Omega) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Suzuki Grand Vitara, Suzuki Vitara | 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. Suzuki Baleno might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Opel Omega 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.38 m | 4.82 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.50 m | |
|
Suzuki Baleno is smaller. Suzuki Baleno is 44 cm shorter than the Opel Omega, 10 cm narrower, while the height of Suzuki Baleno is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 375 litres | 540 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1800 litres | |
|
Opel Omega has more luggage space. Suzuki Baleno has 165 litres less trunk space than the Opel Omega. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki Baleno is 1.2 metres less than that of the Opel Omega, which means Suzuki Baleno can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`200 | 2`010 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | low | |
| Suzuki Baleno has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Opel Omega has serious deffects in 90 percent more cases than Suzuki Baleno, so Suzuki Baleno quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki Baleno has
|
Opel Omega has
| |