Ford KA 2004 vs Peugeot 206 1998
| 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 | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 105 NM | 120 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15.4 seconds | 12.2 seconds | |
|
Peugeot 206 is a more dynamic driving. Ford KA engine produces 15 HP less power than Peugeot 206, whereas torque is 15 NM less than Peugeot 206. Due to the lower power, Ford KA reaches 100 km/h speed 3.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Peugeot 206 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 Peugeot 206, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford KA could require 60 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 42 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 790 km in combined cycle | |
| 760 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| 600 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
| Peugeot 206 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 320'000 km | 280'000 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 Ford KA engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Ford Fiesta | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen Xsara, Citroen C3, Citroen Berlingo | |
| 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. | |||
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: | no data | 245 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1130 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 (kg): | no data | 1`450 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | Ford KA has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Peugeot 206 has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Ford KA, so Ford KA quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford KA has
|
Peugeot 206 has
| |