Ford KA 1997 vs Peugeot 206 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 60 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 105 NM | 133 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15.4 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
|
Peugeot 206 is a more dynamic driving. Ford KA engine produces 30 HP less power than Peugeot 206, whereas torque is 28 NM less than Peugeot 206. Due to the lower power, Ford KA reaches 100 km/h speed 4.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 6.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.8 l/100km | 6.7 l/100km | |
|
The Peugeot 206 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford KA consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Peugeot 206, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford KA could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford KA consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Peugeot 206. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 42 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 810 km in combined cycle | |
| 760 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
| Peugeot 206 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 320'000 km | 300'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Ford Fiesta | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen C3, Citroen C4, Citroen C2 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Peugeot 206 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Peugeot 206 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.62 m | 3.82 m | |
| Width: | 1.63 m | 1.65 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.43 m | |
|
Ford KA is smaller. Ford KA is 20 cm shorter than the Peugeot 206, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Ford KA is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 186 litres | 210 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
724 litres | 992 litres | |
|
Peugeot 206 has more luggage space. Ford KA has 24 litres less trunk space than the Peugeot 206. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Peugeot 206 (by 268 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 9.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford KA is 0.1 metres less than that of the Peugeot 206. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`265 kg | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Peugeot 206 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford KA has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Peugeot 206, so Peugeot 206 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford KA has
|
Peugeot 206 has
| |