Ford Kuga 2016 vs Ford Kuga 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 180 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
Ford Kuga 2016 is more dynamic to drive. Ford Kuga 2016 engine produces 17 HP more power than Ford Kuga 2013, whereas torque is 60 NM more than Ford Kuga 2013. Thanks to more power Ford Kuga 2016 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.2 | 6.2 | |
|
The Ford Kuga 2016 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Ford Kuga 2016 consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Kuga 2013, which means that by driving the Ford Kuga 2016 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 150 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1150 km in combined cycle | 960 km in combined cycle | |
| 1220 km on highway | 1090 km on highway | ||
| Ford Kuga 2016 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.52 m | 4.52 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.69 m | 1.70 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Ford Kuga 2016 and Ford Kuga 2013 are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 456 litres | 456 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1603 litres | 1568 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Kuga 2016 is 0.1 metres more than that of the Ford Kuga 2013. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`230 | 2`250 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 16 000 | 12 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Kuga has
|
Ford Kuga has
| |