Toyota C-HR 2016 vs Skoda Karoq 2017
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
| 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: | 116 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 185 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.1 seconds | 8.6 seconds | |
|
Skoda Karoq is a more dynamic driving. Toyota C-HR engine produces 34 HP less power than Skoda Karoq, whereas torque is 65 NM less than Skoda Karoq. Due to the lower power, Toyota C-HR reaches 100 km/h speed 2.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Karoq is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Toyota C-HR consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Karoq, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Toyota C-HR could require 60 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Toyota C-HR consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Karoq. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
| Skoda Karoq gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 330'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Skoda Karoq engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Skoda Octavia, Audi A3, Skoda Superb, Skoda Scala, Audi A1, Audi Q3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Skoda Karoq might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Skoda Karoq 2017 1.5 engine: The engine is praised for being both flexible and torquey, delivering impressive performance for its horsepower rating. It is also remarkably fuel-efficient. However, the engine is very demanding when it comes ... More about Skoda Karoq 2017 1.5 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.36 m | 4.38 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.56 m | 1.61 m | |
|
Toyota C-HR is smaller. Toyota C-HR is 2 cm shorter than the Skoda Karoq, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Toyota C-HR is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 377 litres | 521 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1630 litres | |
|
Skoda Karoq has more luggage space. Toyota C-HR has 144 litres less trunk space than the Skoda Karoq. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota C-HR is 0.1 metres more than that of the Skoda Karoq. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`865 | 1`929 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 20 400 | 18 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota C-HR has
|
Skoda Karoq has
| |