Chevrolet Trax 2013 vs Ford EcoSport 2012
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 1.4 - 1.7 | 1.0 - 2.0 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 - 140 HP | 90 - 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 155 - 300 NM | 140 - 215 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 - 12.3 seconds | 11.5 - 14.1 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.5 - 6.5 | 4.4 - 8.3 | |
|
On average, the Chevrolet Trax petrol engines consume nearly the same amount of fuel per 100 km as Ford EcoSport. On average, Chevrolet Trax equipped with diesel engines consume 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford EcoSport. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.25 m | 4.24 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.83 m | |
| Height: | 1.67 m | 1.66 m | |
| Chevrolet Trax and Ford EcoSport are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 356 litres | 333 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1238 litres | |
|
Chevrolet Trax has more luggage capacity. Chevrolet Trax has 23 litres more trunk space than the Ford EcoSport. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Trax is 0.3 metres more than that of the Ford EcoSport. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`863 | ~ 1`732 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Chevrolet Trax scores higher in safety tests, but Ford EcoSport is better rated in child safety tests. The Chevrolet Trax scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 8400 | 10 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Trax has
|
Ford EcoSport has
| |