Jeep Compass 2011 vs Ford Kuga 2008
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 200 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.7 seconds | 8.8 seconds | |
|
Ford Kuga is a more dynamic driving. Jeep Compass engine produces 30 HP less power than Ford Kuga, whereas torque is 100 NM less than Ford Kuga. Due to the lower power, Jeep Compass reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.6 | 10.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.7 l/100km | 11.5 l/100km | |
|
The Jeep Compass is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Jeep Compass consumes 1.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Kuga, which means that by driving the Jeep Compass over 15,000 km in a year you can save 255 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Jeep Compass consumes 1.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Kuga. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 590 km in combined cycle | 560 km in combined cycle | |
| 720 km on highway | 740 km on highway | ||
| 520 km with real consumption | 500 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 360'000 km | 630'000 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: | 18 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Jeep Patriot, Dodge Caliber, Dodge Avenger, Chrysler Sebring | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Jeep Compass might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.45 m | 4.44 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.66 m | 1.68 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Jeep Compass and Ford Kuga are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 328 litres | 410 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1269 litres | no data | |
|
Ford Kuga has more luggage space. Jeep Compass has 82 litres less trunk space than the Ford Kuga. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.3 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Compass is 0.3 metres less than that of the Ford Kuga. | |||
| Power steering: | Electric power steering | Hydraulic power steering | |
| Electric power steering is simpler, quieter, more fuel-efficient, more configurable and provides additional features such as auto-steering for lane assist and parking. The disadvantages of electric power steering are possible overheating under prolonged load conditions and insufficient feedback (feeling) during steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`890 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 7200 | 7000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Compass has
|
Ford Kuga has
| |