Skoda Fabia 2017 vs BMW i3 2013
| Comparing electrical vehicle (EV) with combustion engine (ICE) one is a complex task, but we are doing our best. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 0.6 Hybrid | |
| Petrol engines (Skoda Fabia) are generally cheaper to purchase and maintain, with simpler mechanics and consistent highway performance. Hybrid (BMW i3) engines, on the other hand, provide significantly better fuel efficiency and lower emissions, especially in urban and stop-and-go traffic conditions. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 38 HP | |
| Torque: | 200 NM | 56 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 7.9 seconds | |
| Skoda Fabia engine produces 72 HP more power than BMW i3, whereas torque is 144 NM more than BMW i3. Despite the higher power, Skoda Fabia reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Consumption: | 4.6 l/100km | 0.6 l/100km + 13.5 kWh/100km | |
| Fuel cost per 100km: | 8.60 € | 5.20 € | |
|
Change fuel prices per unit to adjust the calculation to the fuel prices in your country. Petrol€/lElectricity€/kWh | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 9 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 970 km in combined cycle | no data | |
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Skoda Fabia) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (BMW i3) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.99 m | 4.00 m | |
| Width: | 1.73 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.58 m | |
|
Skoda Fabia is smaller. Skoda Fabia and BMW i3 are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 330 litres | 260 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1150 litres | 1100 litres | |
|
Skoda Fabia has more luggage capacity. Skoda Fabia has 70 litres more trunk space than the BMW i3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Skoda Fabia (by 50 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 9.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Fabia is 0.5 metres more than that of the BMW i3, which means Skoda Fabia can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`619 kg | 1`730 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`089 kg | 1`315 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 530 kg | 415 kg | |
| Skoda Fabia load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 22 procentiem more than BMW i3. Therefore, Skoda Fabia is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 6400 | 10 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Fabia has
|
BMW i3 has
| |