Suzuki Swift 2010 vs Mitsubishi Colt 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 94 HP | 95 HP | |
| Torque: | 118 NM | 125 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.3 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is a more dynamic driving. Suzuki Swift engine produces 1 HP less power than Mitsubishi Colt, whereas torque is 7 NM less than Mitsubishi Colt. Due to the lower power, Suzuki Swift reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.0 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.2 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km | |
|
The Suzuki Swift is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Suzuki Swift consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt, which means that by driving the Suzuki Swift over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Suzuki Swift consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 42 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 810 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 670 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 280'000 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 Suzuki Swift engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 21 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Suzuki Baleno, Suzuki Ignis | Used also on Smart ForFour | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.85 m | 3.88 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.51 m | 1.52 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Suzuki Swift is 3 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Colt, width is practically the same , while the height of Suzuki Swift is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 204 litres | 220 litres | |
| Suzuki Swift has 16 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.6 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki Swift is 1.2 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Colt, which means Suzuki Swift 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`480 | 1`430 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Suzuki Swift, so Mitsubishi Colt quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 4000 | 2800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki Swift has
|
Mitsubishi Colt has
| |