Subaru Outback 2017 vs Skoda Superb 2015
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Subaru Outback) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Skoda Superb) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 175 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 235 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 seconds | 9 seconds | |
|
Skoda Superb is a more dynamic driving. Subaru Outback engine produces 25 HP more power than Skoda Superb, but torque is 105 NM less than Skoda Superb. Despite the higher power, Subaru Outback reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 4.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 6.2 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Superb is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Subaru Outback consumes 3.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Superb, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Subaru Outback could require 480 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Subaru Outback consumes 2.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Superb. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 66 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 1460 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 1600 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 1060 km with real consumption | ||
| Skoda Superb 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) | |
| Ground clearance: | 200 mm (7.9 inches) | 149 mm (5.9 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Subaru Outback can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.82 m | 4.86 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.86 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Subaru Outback is smaller, but higher. Subaru Outback is 4 cm shorter than the Skoda Superb, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Subaru Outback is 20 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 512 litres | 660 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1848 litres | 1950 litres | |
|
Skoda Superb has more luggage space. Subaru Outback has 148 litres less trunk space than the Skoda Superb. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Skoda Superb (by 102 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Subaru Outback is 0.7 metres less than that of the Skoda Superb, which means Subaru Outback can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`100 kg | 2`085 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`592 kg | 1`445 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 508 kg | 640 kg | |
| Subaru Outback load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 26 procentiem less than Skoda Superb. Therefore, Skoda Superb is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | |||
| Subaru Outback scores higher in safety tests. The Subaru Outback scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 15 200 | 12 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Subaru Outback has
|
Skoda Superb has
| |