Toyota RAV4 2000 vs Suzuki Vitara 1991
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 97 HP | |
| Torque: | 161 NM | 132 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.2 seconds | 14 seconds | |
|
Toyota RAV4 is more dynamic to drive. Toyota RAV4 engine produces 28 HP more power than Suzuki Vitara, whereas torque is 29 NM more than Suzuki Vitara. Thanks to more power Toyota RAV4 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 | 8.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 9.2 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota RAV4 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Toyota RAV4 consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Vitara, which means that by driving the Toyota RAV4 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 150 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Toyota RAV4 consumes 1.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Vitara. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 57 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 650 km in combined cycle | |
| 910 km on highway | 760 km on highway | ||
| 770 km with real consumption | 590 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota RAV4 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) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Corolla, Toyota Corolla Verso | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Suzuki Grand Vitara, Suzuki Baleno | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Toyota RAV4 2000 1.8 engine: The 1ZZ-FE engine is more advanced, lighter, and simpler than its predecessor, emphasizing fuel efficiency and output. However, these improvements have come at the cost of reduced durability compared to earlier cast-iron engines. The engine block features an open-deck cooling design for easier production and lower ... More about Toyota RAV4 2000 1.8 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.20 m | 4.03 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.64 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.70 m | |
|
Toyota RAV4 is larger, but slightly lower. Toyota RAV4 is 17 cm longer than the Suzuki Vitara, 10 cm wider, while the height of Toyota RAV4 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 400 litres | 580 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1150 litres | no data | |
|
Suzuki Vitara has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Toyota RAV4 has 180 litres less trunk space than the Suzuki Vitara. This could mean that the Toyota RAV4 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota RAV4 is 0.2 metres less than that of the Suzuki Vitara. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`730 | 1`650 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | high | |
| Toyota RAV4 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Suzuki Vitara has serious deffects in 290 percent more cases than Toyota RAV4, so Toyota RAV4 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2800 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota RAV4 has
|
Suzuki Vitara has
| |