Among the 14 city cars 2018–2022, the Corsa F 1.2 DI Turbo 130 8AT ranks 3rd of 11 in Combined consumption (5.2 L/100, behind the Skoda Fabia 1.0 TSI 110 7DSG), 7th of 14 in 0–100 km/h (9.0 s, behind the Toyota GR Yaris).
F · GENERATION 2020 → · CITY CAR
OpelICE
Corsa F 1.2 DI Turbo 130 8AT
131 hp, 9,0 s 0-100 : among the 14 city cars 2018–2022, the Corsa F 1.2 DI Turbo 130 8AT ranks 3rd of 11 in Combined consumption, 7th of 14 in 0–100 km/h. Here is what the Caralogy simulations say.
Power
131hp
230 Nm
0 → 100 km/h
9.0s
VMax 208 km/h
Cons.
5.2L
/100 km
Tank
-L
Technical identity card
Full specifications Opel Corsa F 1.2 DI Turbo 130 8AT
Manufacturer data. Consumption and range estimated from the WLTP cycle; performance simulated by the Caralogy physics engine.
Powertrain
| Power | 131 hp |
| Couple | 230 Nm |
| Gearbox | Convertisseur de couple 8 rapports Automatique |
Consumption
| Cons. WLTP | 5.2 L/100km |
Performance
| 0 → 100 km/h | 9,0 s |
| VMax | 208 km/h |
Dimensions and environment
| Kerb weight | 1,245 kg |
| Cd | 0.29 |
Caralogy Methodology
Performance (0-100, top speed) simulated by the Caralogy physics engine (SCx, Crr, real torque curves). Motorway consumption values estimated from the manufacturer WLTP cycle.
See full methodology →Manufacturer data · WLTP-estimated consumption · Caralogy-simulated performance
Among the 14 city cars, the Corsa F 1.2 DI Turbo 130 8AT ranks (top 3 in segment) in fuel consumption. Caralogy simulates its real-world cost: motorway simulation, consumption simulation and performance simulation.
Caralogy Analysis
Tailored to this vehicle?
Caralogy Verdict
Suitable for
Good compromise for regular use without available charging infrastructure. 3rd of 11 in Combined consumption (5.2 L/100).
Alternatives to consider
If the priority is Combined consumption, the Skoda Fabia 1.0 TSI 110 7DSG (1st with 5.1 L/100) takes the lead. If the priority is 0–100 km/h, the Toyota GR Yaris (1st with 5.5 s) takes the lead.
Fuel consumption: 5.2 L/100 L/100 (3rd of 11 in Combined consumption)
The Corsa F 1.2 DI Turbo 130 8AT consumes 5.2 L/100 on the WLTP combined cycle. The segment reference is the Skoda Fabia 1.0 TSI 110 7DSG (5.1 L/100).
Go beyond this analysis
Recalculate everything for your own profile with the three physics simulators that power this page.
Running cost for your profile
Adjust mileage, driving mix and charging type to estimate your annual energy budget.
Launch simulator →Long-distance trip
Simulate any motorway trip: time, charging stops, total cost.
Simulate a trip →Chronos & accélération
0-100, 0-200, courbe de vitesse, positionnement segment.
Voir la performance →Segment positioning
Where the Corsa F 1.2 DI Turbo 130 8AT stands against city cars
Comparison across 14 city cars marketed between 2018–2022.
Combined consumption3e / 11
5.2 L/100
Min 7.1 L/100 · MINI John Cooper Works FWDMax 5.1 L/100 · Skoda Fabia 1.0 TSI 110 7DSG
0–100 km/h7e / 14
9,0 s
Min 14,0 s · Citroen C3 PureTech 83 FWDMax 5,5 s · Toyota GR Yaris
Direct rivals (same segment, same energy)
208 PureTech 130 EAT8131 hp · 0-100 9.6 s
Clio 5 1.3 TCe 140140 hp · 0-100 9.1 s
A1 allstreet 30 TFSI 85 kW116 hp · 0-100 10.3 s
A1 allstreet 30 TFSI S tronic 85 kW116 hp · 0-100 10.3 s
Cross-energy alternatives
Same needs, different powertrain.
Compare
Popular duels involving the Corsa F 1.2 DI Turbo 130 8AT
Frequently asked questions
Opel Corsa F 1.2 DI Turbo 130 8AT: what you need to know
Well-argued answers to the most asked questions about this model, based on Caralogy data and simulations.
Running costs depend on your profile (mileage, charging type, city/highway mix). Use the Caralogy consumption simulator for a personalised estimate.
The Skoda Fabia 1.0 TSI 110 7DSG leads in Combined consumption (5.1 L/100 vs 5.2 L/100). The choice depends on your priorities: check the Corsa F 1.2 DI Turbo 130 8AT vs Skoda Fabia 1.0 TSI 110 7DSG duel for a detailed comparison.
Caralogy does not reproduce manufacturer figures: we recalculate every number through physics simulation, starting from SCx, mass and the power curve. This is why our figures at 130 km/h differ from WLTP. Full methodology on the dedicated page.