Ford Kuga 2016 vs Renault Kadjar 2018
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 159 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 260 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
| Ford Kuga engine produces 9 HP less power than Renault Kadjar, whereas torque is 20 NM less than Renault Kadjar. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.0 | no data | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 320'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Renault Scenic, Renault Megane, Dacia Duster, Dacia Dokker | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Kadjar might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Renault Kadjar 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: | 4.52 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.69 m | 1.61 m | |
|
Ford Kuga is larger. Ford Kuga is 4 cm longer than the Renault Kadjar, width is practically the same , while the height of Ford Kuga is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 456 litres | 472 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1478 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Ford Kuga has 16 litres less trunk space than the Renault Kadjar. This could mean that the Ford Kuga uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Kuga is 0.4 metres more than that of the Renault Kadjar, which means Ford Kuga can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`889 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Renault Kadjar has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Kuga has serious deffects in 85 percent more cases than Renault Kadjar, so Renault Kadjar quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 15 800 | 18 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Kuga has
|
Renault Kadjar has
| |