Suzuki Grand Vitara 2012 vs Skoda Yeti 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 169 HP | 122 HP | |
| Torque: | 227 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
| Suzuki Grand Vitara engine produces 47 HP more power than Skoda Yeti, whereas torque is 27 NM more than Skoda Yeti. Despite the higher power, Suzuki Grand Vitara reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.7 | 6.8 | |
|
The Skoda Yeti is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Suzuki Grand Vitara consumes 2.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Yeti, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Suzuki Grand Vitara could require 435 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 66 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 810 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 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: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 17 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3 | |
| 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 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 2013 1.4 engine: The engine is prone to increased vibration at idle. The engine is also very demanding on fuel quality. The timing chain has a low life expectancy and must be monitored. Turbine problems are also common. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.30 m | 4.22 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.70 m | 1.69 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Suzuki Grand Vitara is 8 cm longer than the Skoda Yeti, 2 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 398 litres | 405 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
758 litres | no data | |
| Despite its longer length, Suzuki Grand Vitara has 7 litres less trunk space than the Skoda Yeti. This could mean that the Suzuki Grand Vitara uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki Grand Vitara is 0.7 metres more than that of the Skoda Yeti, which means Suzuki Grand Vitara can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`100 | 1`940 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | average | |
| Skoda Yeti has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Suzuki Grand Vitara has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Skoda Yeti, so Skoda Yeti quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5600 | 7200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki Grand Vitara has
|
Skoda Yeti has
| |