Ford Kuga 2009 vs Nissan Qashqai 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.0 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: | 200 HP | 141 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 196 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.2 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
Ford Kuga is more dynamic to drive. Ford Kuga engine produces 59 HP more power than Nissan Qashqai, whereas torque is 124 NM more than Nissan Qashqai. Thanks to more power Ford Kuga reaches 100 km/h speed 2.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.9 | 8.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.1 l/100km | 8.9 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Qashqai is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Kuga consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Qashqai, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Kuga could require 255 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Kuga consumes 2.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Qashqai. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 580 km in combined cycle | 790 km in combined cycle | |
| 760 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 520 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan Qashqai gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Nissan Serena | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Qashqai might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.44 m | 4.33 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.62 m | |
|
Ford Kuga is larger. Ford Kuga is 11 cm longer than the Nissan Qashqai, 6 cm wider, while the height of Ford Kuga is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 410 litres | 410 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1513 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Kuga is 1 metres more than that of the Nissan Qashqai, which means Ford Kuga can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`130 | 1`960 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Ford Kuga has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Qashqai has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Ford Kuga, so Ford Kuga quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6400 | 7000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.8/10 | 7.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Kuga has
|
Nissan Qashqai has
| |