Ford EcoSport 2012 vs Suzuki SX4 2013
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 1.0 - 2.0 | 1.6 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 - 140 HP | 117 - 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 140 - 215 NM | 156 - 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.5 - 14.1 seconds | 11 - 13 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.4 - 8.3 | 4.2 - 5.9 | |
|
Ford EcoSport petrol engines consumes on average 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than Suzuki SX4. On average, Ford EcoSport equipped with diesel engines consume 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki SX4. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.24 m | 4.30 m | |
| Width: | 1.83 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.66 m | 1.58 m | |
| Ford EcoSport is 6 cm shorter than the Suzuki SX4, 7 cm wider, while the height of Ford EcoSport is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 333 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1238 litres | 1269 litres | |
|
Suzuki SX4 has more luggage space. Ford EcoSport has 97 litres less trunk space than the Suzuki SX4. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Suzuki SX4 (by 31 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`732 | ~ 1`790 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Suzuki SX4 scores higher in safety tests. The Suzuki SX4 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 10 200 | 9200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Suzuki SX4 has
| |