Suzuki Swift 2005 vs Mitsubishi Colt 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 102 HP | 109 HP | |
| Torque: | 133 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is a more dynamic driving. Suzuki Swift engine produces 7 HP less power than Mitsubishi Colt, whereas torque is 12 NM less than Mitsubishi Colt. Due to the lower power, Suzuki Swift reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.1 | 6.1 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 920 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 660 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Colt gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 21 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Suzuki SX4, Suzuki Ignis | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Smart ForFour, Mitsubishi Xpander | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Colt might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.70 m | 3.88 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.50 m | 1.52 m | |
|
Suzuki Swift is smaller. Suzuki Swift is 19 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Colt, width is practically the same , while the height of Suzuki Swift is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 213 litres | 220 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
562 litres | no data | |
| Suzuki Swift has 7 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.4 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki Swift is 1.4 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Colt, which means Suzuki Swift can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`485 | 1`440 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Suzuki Swift has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2800 | 2800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki Swift has
|
Mitsubishi Colt has
| |