Suzuki Baleno 1995 vs Toyota RAV4 2009
| Body: | Estate car / wagon | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 96 HP | 158 HP | |
| Torque: | 134 NM | 198 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.2 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Toyota RAV4 is a more dynamic driving. Suzuki Baleno engine produces 62 HP less power than Toyota RAV4, whereas torque is 64 NM less than Toyota RAV4. Due to the lower power, Suzuki Baleno reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.5 | 7.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 8.9 l/100km | |
|
The Suzuki Baleno is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Suzuki Baleno consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota RAV4, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Suzuki Baleno could require 15 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Suzuki Baleno consumes 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota RAV4. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 810 km in combined cycle | |
| 820 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Suzuki Grand Vitara, Suzuki Vitara | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Lexus NX, Toyota C-HR | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Toyota RAV4 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 | 4.34 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.72 m | |
| Suzuki Baleno is 4 cm longer than the Toyota RAV4, 13 cm narrower, while the height of Suzuki Baleno is 26 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 375 litres | 450 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1752 litres | |
|
Toyota RAV4 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Suzuki Baleno has 75 litres less trunk space than the Toyota RAV4. This could mean that the Suzuki Baleno uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki Baleno is 1.2 metres less than that of the Toyota RAV4, which means Suzuki Baleno can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`200 | 2`070 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 6400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki Baleno has
|
Toyota RAV4 has
| |