Skoda Fabia 2004 vs Volkswagen Tiguan 2009
| Body: | Sedan | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 200 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 280 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 seconds | 7.9 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Tiguan is a more dynamic driving. Skoda Fabia engine produces 85 HP less power than Volkswagen Tiguan, whereas torque is 110 NM less than Volkswagen Tiguan. Due to the lower power, Skoda Fabia reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 8.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.5 l/100km | 10.1 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Fabia is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Skoda Fabia consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Tiguan, which means that by driving the Skoda Fabia over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Skoda Fabia consumes 2.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Tiguan. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 580 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 760 km on highway | 950 km on highway | ||
| 600 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Tiguan 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: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Volkswagen Tiguan 2007: Engine power is automatically (without driver intervention) distributed among the wheels based on conditions using a hydraulic multi-disc clutch, viscous clutch, or similar traction control device. Some systems allow locking of multi-disc clutch manually for permanent all wheel drive. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.22 m | 4.43 m | |
| Width: | 1.65 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.69 m | |
|
Skoda Fabia is smaller. Skoda Fabia is 21 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Tiguan, 16 cm narrower, while the height of Skoda Fabia is 24 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 438 litres | 470 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
789 litres | 1510 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Tiguan has more luggage space. Skoda Fabia has 32 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Tiguan. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volkswagen Tiguan (by 721 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Fabia is 1.5 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Tiguan, which means Skoda Fabia can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`655 | 2`210 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | Volkswagen Tiguan has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Skoda Fabia has serious deffects in 55 percent more cases than Volkswagen Tiguan, so Volkswagen Tiguan quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 7200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Fabia has
|
Volkswagen Tiguan has
| |