Ford KA 1997 vs Hyundai Atos 1997
Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
---|---|---|---|
Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.0 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: | 60 HP | 55 HP | |
Torque: | 105 NM | 82 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15.4 seconds | 15.1 seconds | |
Ford KA engine produces 5 HP more power than Hyundai Atos, whereas torque is 23 NM more than Hyundai Atos. Despite the higher power, Ford KA reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 6.3 | |
Real fuel consumption: | 6.8 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
The Ford KA is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Ford KA consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Hyundai Atos, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford KA could require 60 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Ford KA consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Hyundai Atos. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 42 litres | 35 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 550 km in combined cycle | |
760 km on highway | 640 km on highway | ||
610 km with real consumption | 460 km with real consumption | ||
Ford KA gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
Average engine lifespan: | 320'000 km | 280'000 km | |
Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Ford KA engine could be longer. | |||
Engine production duration: | 6 years | 6 years | |
Engine spread: | Used also on Ford Fiesta | Used only for this car | |
In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Ford KA might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 3.62 m | 3.50 m | |
Width: | 1.63 m | 1.50 m | |
Height: | 1.37 m | 1.58 m | |
Ford KA is larger, but lower. Ford KA is 12 cm longer than the Hyundai Atos, 13 cm wider, while the height of Ford KA is 21 cm lower. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 186 litres | 263 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
724 litres | 1064 litres | |
Hyundai Atos has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Ford KA has 77 litres less trunk space than the Hyundai Atos. This could mean that the Ford KA uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Hyundai Atos (by 340 litres). | |||
Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 9.1 meters | |
The turning circle of the Ford KA is 0.7 metres more than that of the Hyundai Atos, which means Ford KA can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | 1`265 | 1`220 | |
Safety: | no data | ||
Quality: | low | below average | |
Hyundai Atos has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford KA has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Hyundai Atos, so Hyundai Atos quality is probably slightly better | |||
Average price (€): | 800 | 800 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Ford KA has
|
Hyundai Atos has
| |