Ford Cougar 1998 vs Volkswagen Beetle 2011
| Body: | Coupe | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 200 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 NM | 280 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 7.5 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Beetle is a more dynamic driving. Ford Cougar engine produces 30 HP less power than Volkswagen Beetle, whereas torque is 60 NM less than Volkswagen Beetle. Due to the lower power, Ford Cougar reaches 100 km/h speed 2.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.6 | 7.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.5 l/100km | 10.0 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Beetle is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Cougar consumes 1.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Beetle, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Cougar could require 285 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Cougar consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Beetle. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 830 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
| 570 km with real consumption | 550 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 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 Cougar engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Ford Mondeo | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Audi A3, Volkswagen Passat CC, Audi TT | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Beetle might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.70 m | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.32 m | 1.49 m | |
| Ford Cougar is 42 cm longer than the Volkswagen Beetle, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Cougar is 17 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 310 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
930 litres | 905 litres | |
|
Ford Cougar has more luggage capacity. Ford Cougar has 120 litres more trunk space than the Volkswagen Beetle. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford Cougar (by 25 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Cougar is 0.1 metres more than that of the Volkswagen Beetle. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`825 | 1`850 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 9200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Cougar has
|
Volkswagen Beetle has
| |