Ford KA 2008 vs Skoda Citigo 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 69 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 102 NM | 95 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.1 seconds | 13.2 seconds | |
| Ford KA engine produces 6 HP less power than Skoda Citigo, but torque is 7 NM more than Skoda Citigo. Despite less power, Ford KA reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 | 4.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.3 l/100km | 5.4 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Citigo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford KA consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Citigo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford KA could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford KA consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Citigo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 35 litres | 35 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km on highway | 940 km on highway | ||
| 550 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| Skoda Citigo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.62 m | 3.56 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.65 m | |
| Height: | 1.51 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Ford KA is larger. Ford KA is 6 cm longer than the Skoda Citigo, 2 cm wider, while the height of Ford KA is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 224 litres | 251 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
710 litres | no data | |
|
Skoda Citigo has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Ford KA has 27 litres less trunk space than the Skoda Citigo. This could mean that the Ford KA uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.3 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford KA is 0.5 metres less than that of the Skoda Citigo, which means Ford KA can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`320 | 1`290 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Skoda Citigo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford KA has serious deffects in 60 percent more cases than Skoda Citigo, so Skoda Citigo quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3000 | 4800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford KA has
|
Skoda Citigo has
| |