Skoda Superb III Combi
Car comparison
Skoda Superb III Combi 1.8 TSIvsMini Clubman (F54) 2.0d
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonMini Clubman (F54)
2.0d
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Mini Clubman (F54) 2.0d
- Quickest 0-100 km/h7.4 s
- Most powerful190 hp142 kW
- Highest torque400 Nm295 lb-ft
- Lightest1,405 kg3,097 lb
- Best power-to-weight135 hp/t101 kW/t7.4 kg/hp
- Lowest combined fuel consumption4.4 L/100 km53.5 mpg US64.2 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption5.0 L/100 km47.0 mpg US56.5 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption4.1 L/100 km57.4 mpg US68.9 mpg UK
- Lowest CO2 emissions117 g/km
- Best performance score52/100
- Best economy score95/100
Skoda Superb III Combi 1.8 TSI
- Fastest top speed230 km/h143 mph
- Best estimated range1,100 km684 mi
- Largest trunk660 L
- Best overall score61/100
- Best practicality score90/100
Specification comparison
| Model | SkodaSuperb III Combi1.8 TSI | MiniClubman (F54)2.0d |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 180hp134kW | 190hp142kW |
| Torque | 250Nm184lb-ft | 400Nm295lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,445kg3,186lb | 1,405kg3,097lb |
| Gross weight | 2,095kg4,619lb | 1,980kg4,365lb |
| Top speed | 230 km/h 143 mph | 225 km/h 140 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 79.1s99% target: 228 km/h / 141 mph Calculated | 68.6s99% target: 223 km/h / 138 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 8.2s | 7.4s |
| 0-200 km/h | 32.6s Calculated | 30.8s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 7.8s Calculated | 7.0s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 6L/100 km39.2mpg US47.1mpg UK | 4.4L/100 km53.5mpg US64.2mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 7.4L/100 km31.8mpg US38.2mpg UK | 5L/100 km47mpg US56.5mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 5.2L/100 km45.2mpg US54.3mpg UK | 4.1L/100 km57.4mpg US68.9mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.9s Calculated | 15.3s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 125hp/t93kW/t57hp/1000 lb Calculated | 135hp/t101kW/t61hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 173Nm/t116lb-ft/ton Calculated | 285Nm/t190lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 1,100km684mi Calculated | 1,091km678mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,798cc110cu in | 1,995cc122cu in |
| Length | 4,856mm191in | 4,253mm167in |
| Width | 1,864mm73in | 1,800mm71in |
| Height | 1,477mm58in | 1,441mm57in |
| Wheelbase | 2,841mm112in | 2,670mm105in |
| Front track | 1,584mm62in | 1,560mm61in |
| Rear track | 1,572mm62in | 1,561mm61in |
| Ground clearance | 149mm6in | 141mm6in |
| Trunk volume | 660L | 360L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,950L | 1,250L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 66L | 48L |
| CO2 emissions | 137g/km | 117g/km |
Performance charts
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Dyno simulation
Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.
- Skoda Superb III Combi 1.8 TSI: Power / Torque
- Mini Clubman (F54) 2.0d: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| SkodaSuperb III Combi1.8 TSI | 5,100-6,200 rpm | 1,250-5,000 rpm | 6,450 rpm |
| MiniClubman (F54)2.0d | 4,000 rpm | 1,750-2,500 rpm | 4,250 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | SkodaSuperb III Combi1.8 TSI | MiniClubman (F54)2.0d |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 7.8 s | 7.0 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 8.2 s | 7.4 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 32.6 s | 30.8 s |
| Top speed | 230 km/h 143 mph | 225 km/h 140 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.8 s | 2.7 s |
330 ft 101 m | 7.1 s | 6.8 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.6 s | 10.1 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.5 s | 12.9 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.9 s | 15.3 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 150 km/h 93 mph | 154 km/h 96 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SkodaSuperb III Combi1.8 TSI | 180 hp 134 kW |
| MiniClubman (F54)2.0d | 190 hp 142 kW |
Mini Clubman (F54) 2.0d has 10 hp more than Skoda Superb III Combi 1.8 TSI.
The biggest power difference is between Skoda Superb III Combi 1.8 TSI and Mini Clubman (F54) 2.0d: 10 hp (7 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SkodaSuperb III Combi1.8 TSI | 250 Nm 184 lb-ft |
| MiniClubman (F54)2.0d | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SkodaSuperb III Combi1.8 TSI | 1,445 kg 3,186 lb |
| MiniClubman (F54)2.0d | 1,405 kg 3,097 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SkodaSuperb III Combi1.8 TSI | 230 km/h 143 mph |
| MiniClubman (F54)2.0d | 225 km/h 140 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SkodaSuperb III Combi1.8 TSI | 8.2 s |
| MiniClubman (F54)2.0d | 7.4 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Mini Clubman (F54) 2.0d and Skoda Superb III Combi 1.8 TSI: 0.8 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SkodaSuperb III Combi1.8 TSI | 6.0 L/100 km 39.2 mpg US 47.1 mpg UK |
| MiniClubman (F54)2.0d | 4.4 L/100 km 53.5 mpg US 64.2 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Mini Clubman (F54) 2.0d and Skoda Superb III Combi 1.8 TSI: 1.6 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SkodaSuperb III Combi1.8 TSI | 125 hp/t 93 kW/t 8.0 kg/hp |
| MiniClubman (F54)2.0d | 135 hp/t 101 kW/t 7.4 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SkodaSuperb III Combi1.8 TSI | 1,100 km 684 mi |
| MiniClubman (F54)2.0d | 1,091 km 678 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| SkodaSuperb III Combi1.8 TSI | 180 hp 134 kW | 8.2 s | 230 km/h 143 mph |
| MiniClubman (F54)2.0d | 190 hp 142 kW | 7.4 s | 225 km/h 140 mph |
Most attractive quadrant
Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Practicality score | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SkodaSuperb III Combi1.8 TSI |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| MiniClubman (F54)2.0d |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Performance vs fuel economy
Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Fuel economy score | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SkodaSuperb III Combi1.8 TSI |
| 6.0 L/100 km 39.2 mpg US 47.1 mpg UK | ||||||
| MiniClubman (F54)2.0d |
| 4.4 L/100 km 53.5 mpg US 64.2 mpg UK | ||||||
Mini Clubman (F54) 2.0d is closest to the top-right balance target for performance and fuel economy.
Acceleration vs fuel consumption
Cars closer to the lower-left corner offer a better mix of quick acceleration and low fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Fuel consumption, L/100 km | 0-100 km/h, s |
|---|---|---|
| SkodaSuperb III Combi1.8 TSI | 6.0 L/100 km 39.2 mpg US 47.1 mpg UK | 8.2 s |
| MiniClubman (F54)2.0d | 4.4 L/100 km 53.5 mpg US 64.2 mpg UK | 7.4 s |
Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption
The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Power-to-weight, hp/t | Fuel consumption, L/100 km |
|---|---|---|
| SkodaSuperb III Combi1.8 TSI | 125 hp/t 93 kW/t 8.0 kg/hp | 6.0 L/100 km 39.2 mpg US 47.1 mpg UK |
| MiniClubman (F54)2.0d | 135 hp/t 101 kW/t 7.4 kg/hp | 4.4 L/100 km 53.5 mpg US 64.2 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | SkodaSuperb III Combi1.8 TSI | MiniClubman (F54)2.0d | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 180 hp 134 kW | 190 hp 142 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 250 Nm 184 lb-ft | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 8.2 s | 7.4 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 230 km/h 143 mph | 225 km/h 140 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,445 kg 3,186 lb | 1,405 kg 3,097 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 6.0 L/100 km 39.2 mpg US 47.1 mpg UK | 4.4 L/100 km 53.5 mpg US 64.2 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 1,100 km 684 mi | 1,091 km 678 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 137 g/km | 117 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 660 L 23.3 cu ft | 360 L 12.7 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 125 hp/t 93 kW/t 8.0 kg/hp | 135 hp/t 101 kW/t 7.4 kg/hp | ||||||||||||||||
| Overall | Fixed score | Fixed score |
Fuel cost and annual usage
Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.
Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.
LC = Local Currency
| Vehicle | Skoda Superb III Combi 1.8 TSI | Mini Clubman (F54) 2.0d |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 6 L/100 km39.2 mpg US47.1 mpg UK | 4.4 L/100 km53.5 mpg US64.2 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 10.50 LC100 km | 7.70 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 16.90 LC100 mi | 12.39 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 900 L238 US gal198 UK gal | 660 L174 US gal145 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,575 LC/year | 1,155 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Skoda Superb III Combi 1.8 TSI
- Has 5 km/h (3 mph) higher top speed
- Has 9 km (6 mi) more estimated range
- Has 300 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Best estimated range
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Heaviest
- Highest CO2 emissions
Mini Clubman (F54) 2.0d
- Has 10 hp more
- Has 150 Nm more
- Is 40 kg lighter
- Is 0.8 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Uses 1.6 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 11 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Emits 20 g/km less CO2
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Lightest
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Lowest top speed
- Smallest trunk
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























