Suzuki Vitara 1991 vs Toyota RAV4 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.8 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: | 97 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 132 NM | 161 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14 seconds | 12.2 seconds | |
|
Toyota RAV4 is a more dynamic driving. Suzuki Vitara engine produces 28 HP less power than Toyota RAV4, whereas torque is 29 NM less than Toyota RAV4. Due to the lower power, Suzuki Vitara reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.4 | 7.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.2 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota RAV4 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Suzuki Vitara 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 Vitara could require 150 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Suzuki Vitara consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota RAV4. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 57 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 760 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| 590 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota RAV4 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Suzuki Grand Vitara, Suzuki Baleno | Installed on at least 4 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 2000 1.8 engine: The 1ZZ-FE engine is more advanced, lighter, and simpler than its predecessor, emphasizing fuel efficiency and output. However, these improvements have come at the cost of reduced durability compared to earlier cast-iron engines. The engine block features an open-deck cooling design for easier production and lower ... More about Toyota RAV4 2000 1.8 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.03 m | 4.20 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.70 m | 1.68 m | |
|
Suzuki Vitara is smaller, but slightly higher. Suzuki Vitara is 17 cm shorter than the Toyota RAV4, 10 cm narrower, while the height of Suzuki Vitara is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 580 litres | 400 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1150 litres | |
|
Suzuki Vitara has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Suzuki Vitara has 180 litres more trunk space than the Toyota RAV4. The Toyota RAV4 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki Vitara is 0.2 metres more than that of the Toyota RAV4. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`650 | 1`730 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | high | |
| Toyota RAV4 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Suzuki Vitara has serious deffects in 290 percent more cases than Toyota RAV4, so Toyota RAV4 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2600 | 2800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki Vitara has
|
Toyota RAV4 has
| |