Test drive comparison of four profitable compact hatchback models

They look at each other Fiat Tipo hatchback, Ford Focus, Kia Cee`d and Skoda Quick return

With the Tipo, the Fiat brand is back in the compact class. In previous years, it recalls both the name and even more - its price, which in Germany starts at 14 euros for the hatchback variant. The Tipo runs in this test with a turbocharged petrol engine and the latest equipment, but is much cheaper than its well-known rivals the Ford Focus, Kia Cee'd and Skoda Rapid Spaceback. We have yet to find out if that will make him a winner.

Finally, we have the opportunity to start with a quote from Ms. Ja Gabor, who once said, "Darling, if you're jealous of a better woman, it won't make you prettier." What does the Fiat Tipo have to do with it? Oh, many things - including us, who, when evaluating cars, prefer to strive for the unattainable, rather than enjoy the possible. Whatever the case, Tipo allows you to buy, perhaps for the first time, a new car and have money left over for other expenses such as vacations, dentists and additional taxes.

Don't you think this is an odd approach for a magazine dedicated to car charm? Aren't we always praising the models more for how beautiful they wear on corners than for their rich standard equipment and reasonable price? That's right, you caught us. But we also have an explanation. Here is:

Fiat - the importance of price

There is probably a heavier legacy than the Fiat Bravo. For him, the price was often the most important argument in favor of the purchase, so it was the most optimal for his successor. Developed jointly with the Turkish branch of Tofas, the car rolled off the assembly line at the Bursa plant. In some countries it is called Aegea, and in Europe - Tipo. In Germany, the hatchback version costs 14 euros, the sedan is 990 euros cheaper, and the station wagon is 1000 euros more expensive. There are two more levels above the basic configuration, two petrol and two diesel engines (1000 and 95 hp in both cases) - and that's it.

Before us is the Tipo 1.4 T-Jet Lounge, a more powerful gasoline version with a top-end package - a pretty solid car. We have long unlearned to copy price lists, but here it is appropriate. For €18, the Tipo is available in Germany with 190-inch alloy wheels, freeze current automatic air conditioning, USB/Bluetooth and transverse lighting. There is everything you need to drive - a conclusion that will remain unchanged, as well as the wise notion that rich equipment does not mean a good car (note, because then we need a Kia).

Whatever we say, the Tipo is definitely a spacious car. It outperforms its competitors in terms of cargo volume and offers plenty of room in the hard-padded rear seat. The model places the pilot and navigator above the rest - in Cee'd the driver sits eight centimeters, and in Focus and Rapid - five centimeters lower. Leather chairs (additional cost) look more comfortable than they are - they lack lateral support and upholstery thickness.

The range of quality materials is quite wide. While the seven-inch touchscreen gives off a high-end impression and the air conditioning controls are adorned with chrome edges, the rest of the interior makes us agree with Fiat that it "looks solid." Controlling functions in the fast, easily customizable infotainment system and cruise control via buttons on the distance-adjustable steering wheel (surcharge) is easy. So far so good, but when driving is important and yes, driving itself.

The 1400 cc four-cylinder engine and multi-point instead of direct injection has been acting like a turbocharger since ancient times. At first, at low pressure, he passes through the zone of calm, and when the speed exceeds 2500, he is not inclined to exaggerate, but shows an increased temperament. At 5000 rpm, the engine loses its thrust for something more and, despite good dynamic performance, it seems phlegmatic, and its consumption is too high (8,3 l / 100 km). Added to that is the problem with the gearbox, which invites you to compress each of the six gears well and lags behind in sync when shifting quickly.

Even so, driving fast does not suit Tipo's character. The good things about the steering system are that it changes direction and has a relaxed mode for City maneuvering. For the rest, he works with Tipo in turn, devoid of feedback and accuracy. The Fiat model runs on secondary roads, drives safely, but without any ambition. Thanks to the stiff suspension, it rides quite rigidly when empty, but it can withstand loads even with uneven waves on the asphalt. All this can be swallowed with a number: as of equipment in Germany Tipo is almost 6200 euros cheaper than the Focus.

Ford is the perfect line

However, it only takes two turns to consider if the Focus is still worth the money and if you really don't care that it offers less space. The Focus has the smallest boot space and no other vehicle tested has rear passengers more limited space. However, here is the most comfortable back seat. The front end moves in excellent conditions on deeply integrated seats, from which you can observe both the varied selection of materials and the convoluted ergonomics that we are often unhappy with.

However, we praised the Focus just as often for its engine, steering and chassis. We hit the start button, the turbocharged three-cylinder engine rings out a tiny drum sound, and the Focus takes off. According to the measured values, it is slower than the Fiat model. But the compact Ford plays very quickly as the actor plays the part on stage. The engine moves forward evenly, gains momentum tirelessly, remains quiet. What about big wave turbulence? It is no longer there, and 170 Newton meters can hardly be called a wave of torque. The Focus, on the other hand, shifts motivated and fast with six crisp clicks.

The suspension, which has been slightly beefed up during the latest model upgrade, provides balanced comfort for both empty and loaded vehicles. At the same time, Focus returned to its previous sharpness. And how it just rounds corners with its precise, direct yet not restlessly responsive steering, how it drives with neutral cornering behavior and only shifts the rear slightly when dynamic load changes – it's all so precise, nimble and fun! Even those who know how to quote price lists are impressed, but feel that the joy of dynamic management has been overrated.

In addition, strong brakes, an armada of assistants, as well as the lowest fuel consumption in the test (7,6 l / 100 km) are worth noting in the Focus - to all those who, even after two turns, are looking for a reasonable reason to like it.

Kia - maturity profile

For Kia Cee'd, there has never been a lack of reasonable grounds. In short: a seven-year warranty. More importantly, Cee'd now has a three-cylinder turbocharged petrol engine under the hood. Its power and torque values ​​are almost exactly the same as those proposed by Ford. Both cars differ slightly in terms of driving dynamics and fuel consumption (Kia: 7,7 l/100 km). However, the Cee'd accelerates tentatively and doesn't pick up speed with the effortless ease of the Focus - not much of a difference.

Recently, however, in the compact class, only small differences are important for the result. After four and a half years in the market, the Cee'd looks fresh, and the rich standard equipment makes it a great deal. In addition, despite its small size, it has a lot of space in the cabin, its functions are quick and easy to use, it has interesting decor and instills solidity, thanks in part to its large, well-used trunk. But this car will never be comfortable because the seats are too hard and lack lateral support. However, the main reason is the chassis.

The test Cee'd is presented in the GT Line version, which differs from the others not only with stylistic elements, but also with the so-called "specially tuned chassis" from Kia. Wow, you think, knowing the settings have been pretty special so far, combining awkward handling with mediocre comfort. However, this only intensified. The Cee'd still has poor ride comfort and stiff springs rebound on short bumps, and shock absorbers allow for confident cornering. And the steering never lets him get nimble. It offers three options for servo amplifier characteristics and somehow avoids precision and road feedback in all three. Yes, the Cee'd walks and drives fine, but never as beautiful and fun as the Focus. And since it stops being mediocre and not too cheap, the Kia model lags far behind in the ratings. You see what constant obedience to reason can lead to.

Skoda - the art of being small

The desire for something not very reasonable led Skoda to the idea of ​​​​Rapid Spaceback. More luxurious than the impersonal sedan, it should have been positioned as a cheap alternative in the compact class – we are talking about the fall of 2013. The Rapid is based on the Fabia II and after the launch of the approximately 1000 euro cheaper and larger Fabia Combi, its role in the brand's lineup seems unclear.

Compared to its more impressive rivals, the narrow Rapid actually looks like a smaller car. However, it is space efficient and comes closest to the Tipo in terms of cargo volume, and the rear is roomier than the Focus. In the Monte Carlo version, the Rapid furniture includes sports seats with good lateral support, the backrests of which are adjustable with a rather rough click. However, this is not annoying in Rapid, where functions are controlled logically and there is not much to control. It would be even better if there were paddle shifters.

One final note stems from the fact that in the Rapid, the folks at Skoda are combining a 1,4-liter turbo petrol engine with only a dual-clutch transmission, resulting in a rather tumultuous engagement. The light Spaceback accelerates faster, overtakes more vigorously, and during this time the transmission shifts gears accurately and non-stop. But the economical four-cylinder engine (7,2 l / 100 km) vibrates noticeably at high revs. This results in deduction of points, so it is suitable for the rough temper of the Rapid, which with its hard settings taps a little arrogantly on short bumps (this effect is mitigated by increasing the load). However, unlike the Cee'd, the Rapid has no tendency to wobble and compensates for its stiffness with good handling. The car makes turns with precision and neutrality and, when the throttle is released, slightly tilts the rear to the side. Only on poor surfaces do bumps occur to the chassis and steering.

However, this combination of a small, spacious car, agility, energetic engine and rich equipment is quite expensive for a model designed as a cheap proposition. So, we can finish with the old wisdom - cars are not bought at a bargain price. The best is never what we can afford, but what is worth striving for.

Text: Sebastian Renz

Photo: Hans-Dieter Zeifert

Evaluation

1. Ford Focus - 329 points

For anyone who appreciates cornering, none of the participants in the test overcomes them faster than the Focus. However, credit for its final victory is primarily due to good brakes, rich safety equipment and increased driving comfort.

Skoda Rapid Spaceback - 320 points

For everyone who appreciates internal qualities - none of the test participants has a more temperamental bike. Despite its small size, the Rapid has plenty of room. However, in terms of comfort and safety, it is obvious that it is built on an outdated and small base.

3. Kia Sead - 288 points

For anyone who appreciates looks, the chic Cee'd offers plenty of space and a first-class interior, while being economical and with a long warranty. Brakes, ride comfort and intermediate acceleration are weak, handling is moderate.

4. Fiat Tipo - 279 points

For everyone who values ​​their money - Fiat offers a really big car at a modest (for Germany) price. Enough space and equipment, otherwise much average. Vibration brakes, simple materials and high consumption lead to deductions.

technical details

1. Ford Focus	2. Skoda Rapid Spaceback	3. Kia Sied	4.Fiat Type
Working volume	998 cc cm	1395 cc cm	998 cc cm	1368 cc cm
Power	88 kW (120 hp) at 6000 rpm	92 kW (125 hp) at 5000 rpm	88 kW (120 hp) at 6000 rpm	88 kW (120 hp) at 5000 rpm
Maximum torque	170 Nm at 1400 rpm	200 Nm at 1400 rpm	171 Nm at 1500 rpm	215 Nm at 2500 rpm
Acceleration 0-100 km / h	11,3 with	9,3 with	11,4 with	10,7 with
Braking distances at a speed of 100 km / h	34,9 m	35,9 m	37,6 m	36,4 m
full speed	193 km / h	205 km / h	190 km / h	200 km / h
Average consumption fuel in the test	7,6 l / 100 km	7,2 l / 100 km	7,7 l / 100 km	8,3 l / 100 km
Base Price	-	-	-	-