Skoda Citigo 2012 vs Ford KA 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 69 HP | |
| Torque: | 95 NM | 102 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.2 seconds | 13.1 seconds | |
| Skoda Citigo engine produces 6 HP more power than Ford KA, but torque is 7 NM less than Ford KA. Despite the higher power, Skoda Citigo reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.2 | 5.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.4 l/100km | 6.3 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Citigo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Skoda Citigo consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford KA, which means that by driving the Skoda Citigo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 135 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Skoda Citigo consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford KA. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 35 litres | 35 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 940 km on highway | 790 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 550 km with real consumption | ||
| Skoda Citigo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.56 m | 3.62 m | |
| Width: | 1.65 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.51 m | |
|
Skoda Citigo is smaller. Skoda Citigo is 6 cm shorter than the Ford KA, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Skoda Citigo is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 251 litres | 224 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 710 litres | |
|
Skoda Citigo has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Skoda Citigo has 27 litres more trunk space than the Ford KA. The Ford KA may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 9.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Citigo is 0.5 metres more than that of the Ford KA, which means Skoda Citigo can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`290 | 1`320 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Skoda Citigo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford KA has serious deffects in 60 percent more cases than Skoda Citigo, so Skoda Citigo quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4800 | 3000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Citigo has
|
Ford KA has
| |