Ford Kuga 2013 vs Kia Sportage 2014
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 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: | 182 HP | 135 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 164 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 11.1 seconds | |
|
Ford Kuga is more dynamic to drive. Ford Kuga engine produces 47 HP more power than Kia Sportage, whereas torque is 76 NM more than Kia Sportage. Thanks to more power Ford Kuga reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 6.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.5 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Kia Sportage is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Kuga consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Kia Sportage, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Kuga could require 195 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Kuga consumes 2.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Kia Sportage. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| 570 km with real consumption | 710 km with real consumption | ||
| Kia Sportage 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 Kia Sportage engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Ford Focus | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Kia Ceed, Hyundai Tucson, Hyundai Elantra, Hyundai i30 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Kia Sportage might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Kia Sportage 2014 1.6 engine: The engine is generally a reliable design and not particularly sensitive to fuel quality. However, it is prone to several common issues. One of the most widespread problems is the rapid buildup of carbon ... More about Kia Sportage 2014 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.52 m | 4.44 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.86 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.63 m | |
| Ford Kuga is 8 cm longer than the Kia Sportage, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Kuga is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 456 litres | 564 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1568 litres | no data | |
|
Kia Sportage has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Ford Kuga has 108 litres less trunk space than the Kia Sportage. 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 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Kuga is 0.2 metres more than that of the Kia Sportage. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`830 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | low | |
| Ford Kuga has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Kia Sportage has serious deffects in 70 percent more cases than Ford Kuga, so Ford Kuga quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 400 | 11 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Kuga has
|
Kia Sportage has
| |