Ford KA 1997 vs Suzuki Swift 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 60 HP | 92 HP | |
| Torque: | 105 NM | 116 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15.4 seconds | 12.8 seconds | |
|
Suzuki Swift is a more dynamic driving. Ford KA engine produces 32 HP less power than Suzuki Swift, whereas torque is 11 NM less than Suzuki Swift. Due to the lower power, Ford KA reaches 100 km/h speed 2.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.8 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Suzuki Swift is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford KA consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Swift, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford KA could require 60 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford KA consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Swift. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 42 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 760 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
| Suzuki Swift gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 19 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Ford Fiesta | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Suzuki Liana, Suzuki Wagon R+, Suzuki Ignis, Suzuki Jimny | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Suzuki Swift might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.62 m | 3.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.63 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.54 m | |
|
Ford KA is smaller. Ford KA is 8 cm shorter than the Suzuki Swift, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Ford KA is 17 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 186 litres | 198 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
724 litres | 562 litres | |
| Ford KA has 12 litres less trunk space than the Suzuki Swift. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford KA (by 162 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 9.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford KA is 0.4 metres more than that of the Suzuki Swift, which means Ford KA can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`265 | 1`485 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Suzuki Swift has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford KA has serious deffects in 170 percent more cases than Suzuki Swift, so Suzuki Swift quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford KA has
|
Suzuki Swift has
| |