Suzuki Grand Vitara 1999 vs Toyota RAV4 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 128 HP | 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 174 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 12.1 seconds | |
| Suzuki Grand Vitara engine produces 12 HP more power than Toyota RAV4, but torque is 76 NM less than Toyota RAV4. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.5 | 7.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.2 l/100km | 7.9 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota RAV4 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Suzuki Grand Vitara consumes 2.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota RAV4, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Suzuki Grand Vitara could require 360 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Suzuki Grand Vitara consumes 2.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota RAV4. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 56 litres | 57 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 580 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 700 km on highway | 930 km on highway | ||
| 540 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota RAV4 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 27 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Suzuki SX4 | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Corolla, Toyota Corolla 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 2003 2.0 engine: The engine was known for its solid technical characteristics.
One of its drawbacks is the lack of hydraulic lifters, requiring periodic valve clearance adjustments. The next-generation 1AD-FTV engine was equipped with ... More about Toyota RAV4 2003 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.92 m | 4.26 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.74 m | 1.72 m | |
| Suzuki Grand Vitara is 34 cm shorter than the Toyota RAV4, 4 cm wider, while the height of Suzuki Grand Vitara is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 400 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
828 litres | 1150 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 9.4 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki Grand Vitara is 1.2 metres less than that of the Toyota RAV4, which means Suzuki Grand Vitara can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`600 | 1`930 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Toyota RAV4 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Suzuki Grand Vitara has serious deffects in 75 percent more cases than Toyota RAV4, so Toyota RAV4 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 3200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.5/10 | 8.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki Grand Vitara has
|
Toyota RAV4 has
| |