Ford Ikon 2000 vs Volvo XC60 2009
| Body: | Sedan | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.8 Diesel | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Ford Ikon) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Volvo XC60) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 58 HP | 203 HP | |
| Torque: | 108 NM | 300 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15 seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC60 is a more dynamic driving. Ford Ikon engine produces 145 HP less power than Volvo XC60, whereas torque is 192 NM less than Volvo XC60. Due to the lower power, Ford Ikon reaches 100 km/h speed 6.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | no data | 8.0 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 70 litres | |
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.14 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.38 m | 1.71 m | |
|
Ford Ikon is smaller. Ford Ikon is 49 cm shorter than the Volvo XC60, 26 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Ikon is 33 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 400 litres | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1455 litres | |
|
Volvo XC60 has more luggage space. Ford Ikon has 95 litres less trunk space than the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`080 | 2`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 8600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |