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: | 1.9 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| 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: | 75 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 135 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
| Suzuki Baleno engine produces 75 HP less power than Toyota RAV4, whereas torque is 205 NM less than Toyota RAV4. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.0 | 6.0 | |
|
The Toyota RAV4 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Suzuki Baleno consumes 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 150 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 1000 km in combined cycle | |
| 890 km on highway | 1150 km on highway | ||
| Toyota RAV4 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Toyota RAV4 2009: It has proactive automatic four-wheel drive and acts as front-wheel drive under normal conditions. In the event of wheel slip, torque is transferred to the rear wheels via an electronically controlled multi-plate clutch. The clutch can also be locked manually using a button on the console. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Citroen Xantia, Suzuki Vitara | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Corolla Verso, Toyota Verso | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota RAV4 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| 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 |
1377 litres | 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. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Toyota RAV4 (by 375 litres). | |||
| 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`520 | 2`190 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 6400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki Baleno has
|
Toyota RAV4 has
| |