Ford Kuga 2013 vs Volkswagen Tiguan 2011
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.4 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 | 122 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
|
Ford Kuga is more dynamic to drive. Ford Kuga engine produces 28 HP more power than Volkswagen Tiguan, whereas torque is 40 NM more than Volkswagen Tiguan. Thanks to more power Ford Kuga reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 6.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Tiguan is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Kuga consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Tiguan, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Kuga could require 15 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Kuga consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Tiguan. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 900 km in combined cycle | 980 km in combined cycle | |
| 1070 km on highway | 1160 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Tiguan gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 330'000 km | 380'000 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 Volkswagen Tiguan engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3, Skoda Yeti | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Tiguan might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Tiguan 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 | 4.43 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.70 m | |
|
Ford Kuga is larger, but slightly lower. Ford Kuga is 10 cm longer than the Volkswagen Tiguan, 3 cm wider, while the height of Ford Kuga is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 456 litres | 470 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1568 litres | 1510 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Ford Kuga has 14 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Tiguan. This could mean that the Ford Kuga uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford Kuga (by 58 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Kuga is 1 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Tiguan, which means Ford Kuga can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`100 | 2`080 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | low | |
| Ford Kuga has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Tiguan has serious deffects in 75 percent more cases than Ford Kuga, so Ford Kuga quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 12 200 | 11 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Kuga has
|
Volkswagen Tiguan has
| |