Ford Kuga 2016 vs Opel Antara 2011
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 2.2 Diesel | |
| 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: | 182 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.1 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
Opel Antara is a more dynamic driving. Ford Kuga engine produces 19 HP more power than Opel Antara, but torque is 110 NM less than Opel Antara. Despite the higher power, Ford Kuga reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.7 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
|
The Opel Antara is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Kuga consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Opel Antara, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Kuga could require 165 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Kuga consumes 3.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Opel Antara. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 1030 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 1250 km on highway | ||
| 560 km with real consumption | 860 km with real consumption | ||
| Opel Antara gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 420'000 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 Opel Antara engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Chevrolet Captiva | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Opel Antara might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Opel Antara 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 | 4.60 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.69 m | 1.76 m | |
|
Ford Kuga is smaller. Ford Kuga is 7 cm shorter than the Opel Antara, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Kuga is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 456 litres | 419 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1603 litres | no data | |
|
Ford Kuga has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Ford Kuga has 37 litres more trunk space than the Opel Antara. The Opel Antara may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 12.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Kuga is 1.2 metres less than that of the Opel Antara, which means Ford Kuga can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`200 | 2`505 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 16 000 | 8200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Kuga has
|
Opel Antara has
| |