Suzuki SX4 2006 vs Skoda Yeti 2009
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 107 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 175 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.5 seconds | 11.8 seconds | |
|
Suzuki SX4 is more dynamic to drive. Suzuki SX4 engine produces 2 HP more power than Skoda Yeti, but torque is 30 NM less than Skoda Yeti. Thanks to more power Suzuki SX4 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 6.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Yeti is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Suzuki SX4 consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Yeti, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Suzuki SX4 could require 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Suzuki SX4 consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Yeti. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 760 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 630 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| 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: | 25 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Suzuki Grand Vitara, Suzuki Swift, Suzuki Liana, Suzuki Vitara | Installed on at least 14 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Polo, Skoda Fabia, Seat Altea | |
| 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. | |||
| Suzuki SX4 2006 1.6 engine: A simple and robust engine, not particularly demanding in terms of fuel quality.
High engine timing chain lifetime.
Tends to increase oil consumption, head gasket failures may occur. Skoda Yeti 2009 1.2 engine: Although the engine has a chain, its lifetime is relatively short. Vibration at idling speed tends to be excessive. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.16 m | 4.22 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.62 m | 1.69 m | |
|
Suzuki SX4 is smaller. Suzuki SX4 is 6 cm shorter than the Skoda Yeti, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Suzuki SX4 is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 270 litres | 405 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1045 litres | no data | |
|
Skoda Yeti has more luggage space. Suzuki SX4 has 135 litres less trunk space than the Skoda Yeti. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki SX4 is 0.3 metres more than that of the Skoda Yeti. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`670 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Skoda Yeti has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Suzuki SX4 has serious deffects in 115 percent more cases than Skoda Yeti, so Skoda Yeti quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3000 | 6600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki SX4 has
|
Skoda Yeti has
| |