Ford Galaxy 2006 vs Kia Carnival 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 185 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 343 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Ford Galaxy engine produces 45 HP less power than Kia Carnival, whereas torque is 23 NM less than Kia Carnival. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.5 | 7.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.2 l/100km | 11.9 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Galaxy is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Galaxy consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Kia Carnival, which means that by driving the Ford Galaxy over 15,000 km in a year you can save 195 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Galaxy consumes 4.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Kia Carnival. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1070 km in combined cycle | 1020 km in combined cycle | |
| 1270 km on highway | 1250 km on highway | ||
| 970 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 18 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Ford Focus, Ford Mondeo, Ford C-Max, Ford S-Max | Used also on Hyundai Terracan | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Ford Galaxy 2006 2.0 engine: In early production engines, the camshaft timing chain often stretched, requiring timely replacement to avoid potential issues. The fuel system, equipped with piezo injectors, is highly sensitive to fuel ... More about Ford Galaxy 2006 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.82 m | 4.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.98 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.82 m | |
| Ford Galaxy is 1 cm longer than the Kia Carnival, 13 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Galaxy is 10 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | no data | |
| Trunk capacity: | 308 litres | 364 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 308 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | no data | 364 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
2325 litres | 1666 litres | |
| The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford Galaxy (by 659 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 11.6 meters | |
| Gross weight: | 2`505 kg | 2`920 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`735 kg | 2`114 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 770 kg | 806 kg | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | low | |
| Ford Galaxy has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Kia Carnival has serious deffects in 375 percent more cases than Ford Galaxy, so Ford Galaxy quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3200 | 3200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Galaxy has
|
Kia Carnival has
| |