Ford Kuga 2008 vs BMW X3 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.5 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 | 218 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.8 seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
| Ford Kuga engine produces 18 HP less power than BMW X3, but torque is 70 NM more than BMW X3. Despite less power, Ford Kuga reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.3 | 9.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.5 l/100km | 11.9 l/100km | |
|
By specification Ford Kuga consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Kuga could require 120 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Ford Kuga consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 67 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 560 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 740 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
| 500 km with real consumption | 560 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 630'000 km | 350'000 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 Ford Kuga engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW Z4 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW X3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The BMW X3 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: | 4.44 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.67 m | |
|
Ford Kuga is smaller, but slightly higher. Ford Kuga is 13 cm shorter than the BMW X3, width is practically the same also the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 410 litres | 480 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1560 litres | |
|
BMW X3 has more luggage space. Ford Kuga has 70 litres less trunk space than the BMW X3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Kuga is 0.4 metres less than that of the BMW X3, which means Ford Kuga can be easier 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): | no data | 2`300 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| BMW X3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Kuga has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than BMW X3, so BMW X3 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7200 | 6800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Kuga has
|
BMW X3 has
| |