Ford Scorpio 1994 vs Toyota Verso 2009
| Body: | Estate car / wagon | Minivan / MPV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 HP | 147 HP | |
| Torque: | 175 NM | 180 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.3 seconds | 11.1 seconds | |
|
Toyota Verso is a more dynamic driving. Ford Scorpio engine produces 11 HP less power than Toyota Verso, whereas torque is 5 NM less than Toyota Verso. Due to the lower power, Ford Scorpio reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 | 7.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.7 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Verso is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Scorpio consumes 2.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Verso, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Scorpio could require 360 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Scorpio consumes 2.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Verso. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 650 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota Verso gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Toyota Verso) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Ford Scorpio) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 350'000 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 Scorpio engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 17 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Ford Mondeo | 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.83 m | 4.44 m | |
| Width: | 1.87 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.62 m | |
|
Ford Scorpio is larger, but lower. Ford Scorpio is 39 cm longer than the Toyota Verso, 8 cm wider, while the height of Ford Scorpio is 18 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 178 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 178 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | no data | 484 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1696 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Scorpio is 0.8 metres less than that of the Toyota Verso, which means Ford Scorpio can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | 2`125 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 5400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Scorpio has
|
Toyota Verso has
| |