Ford EcoSport 2013 vs Honda HR-V 2015
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 1.5 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: | 125 HP | 130 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 155 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.7 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Honda HR-V is a more dynamic driving. Ford EcoSport engine produces 5 HP less power than Honda HR-V, but torque is 15 NM more than Honda HR-V. Due to the lower power, Ford EcoSport reaches 100 km/h speed 2.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.3 | 5.6 | |
|
The Ford EcoSport is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Ford EcoSport consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda HR-V, which means that by driving the Ford EcoSport over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 980 km in combined cycle | 890 km in combined cycle | |
| 1100 km on highway | 1040 km on highway | ||
| Ford EcoSport gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 180 mm (7.1 inches) | 170 mm (6.7 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Ford EcoSport can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Ford EcoSport version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 320'000 km | 380'000 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 Honda HR-V engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 12 years | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Honda HR-V might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.27 m | 4.30 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.65 m | 1.61 m | |
|
Ford EcoSport is smaller, but higher. Ford EcoSport is 2 cm shorter than the Honda HR-V, width is practically the same , while the height of Ford EcoSport is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 333 litres | 431 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1238 litres | 1456 litres | |
|
Honda HR-V has more luggage space. Ford EcoSport has 98 litres less trunk space than the Honda HR-V. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Honda HR-V (by 218 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford EcoSport is 0.8 metres less than that of the Honda HR-V, which means Ford EcoSport can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`715 | 1`790 | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Honda HR-V scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 7800 | 15 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford EcoSport has
|
Honda HR-V has
| |