Nissan Juke 2010 vs Ford Kuga 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Nissan Juke) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Ford Kuga) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 117 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 157 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
Ford Kuga is a more dynamic driving. Nissan Juke engine produces 19 HP less power than Ford Kuga, whereas torque is 163 NM less than Ford Kuga. Due to the lower power, Nissan Juke reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 5.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Kuga is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Juke consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Kuga, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Juke could require 105 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 46 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 1090 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 1280 km on highway | ||
| 620 km with real consumption | 780 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford Kuga gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Nissan Juke 2010 1.6 engine: A simple and reliable engine, not particularly demanding on fuel quality. Tends to consume more oil, may have problems starting in cold weather. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.14 m | 4.44 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.57 m | 1.68 m | |
|
Nissan Juke is smaller. Nissan Juke is 31 cm shorter than the Ford Kuga, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Juke is 11 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 251 litres | 410 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
830 litres | no data | |
|
Ford Kuga has more luggage space. Nissan Juke has 159 litres less trunk space than the Ford Kuga. | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | no data | |
| 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`645 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Ford Kuga has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Juke has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Ford Kuga, so Ford Kuga quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6000 | 6400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.3/10 | 8.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Juke has
|
Ford Kuga has
| |