cat_logo
HomeFord

Galaxy

Ford Galaxy Trunk Space in Quick-to-Read Graphs

Average space for all generations

Choose Generation

Quick notes on Ford Galaxy trunk space

    • Trunk capacity for generation: 300 L
    • Amount of carry-on suitcases: 6.7 pcs
    • Amount of average suitcases: 3 pcs
    • Trunk space per 1 passenger: 50 L
    • Max trunk load: 102 kg
    • Interior transformation: flexible
    • Horsepower to trunk space: 1.4 L to 1 hp
    • Torque to trunk capacity: 0.8 to 1 Nm
    • Trunkley rating: 4 / 10

Trunk space to engine power ratio

  • 1.5 EcoBoost : 1.8 L/hp (2.5 L/kW)
  • 2.0 EcoBoost : 1.3 L/hp (1.7 L/kW)
  • 2.0 TDCi : 1.4 L/hp (1.9 L/kW)
  • 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo : 1.3 L/hp (1.7 L/kW)
  • 2.0 EcoBlue : 1.6 L/hp (2.1 L/kW)

    Trunk size and maximum speed comparison

  • 1.5 EcoBoost : 1.54 L/km-h (0.96 L/mph)
  • 2.0 EcoBoost : 1.35 L/km-h (0.84 L/mph)
  • 2.0 TDCi : 1.4 L/km-h (0.87 L/mph)
  • 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo : 1.39 L/km-h (0.86 L/mph)
  • 2.0 EcoBlue : 1.49 L/km-h (0.93 L/mph)

    Trunk capacity to fuel consumption ratio

  • 1.5 EcoBoost : 40x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.0 EcoBoost : 38x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.0 TDCi : 54.5x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo : 49.2x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.0 EcoBlue : 49.2x (Trunk/Consumption)

    • Vehicle Trunk space Trunk to acceleration ratio Trunk space to tank size Trunk space to engine capacity Difference with world average
    1.5 EcoBoost 300 L 32 L to 1 s 4.3x 200x -178L
    2.0 EcoBoost 300 L 37 L to 1 s 4.3x 150x -178L
    2.0 TDCi 300 L 35 L to 1 s 4.3x 150x -178L
    2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo 300 L 36 L to 1 s 4.3x 150x -178L
    2.0 EcoBlue 300 L 32 L to 1 s 4.3x 150x -178L
    Vehicle 1.5 EcoBoost
    Trunk space 300 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 32 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 4.3x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 200x
    Difference with world average -178L
    Vehicle 2.0 EcoBoost
    Trunk space 300 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 37 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 4.3x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 150x
    Difference with world average -178L
    Vehicle 2.0 TDCi
    Trunk space 300 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 35 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 4.3x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 150x
    Difference with world average -178L
    Vehicle 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
    Trunk space 300 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 36 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 4.3x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 150x
    Difference with world average -178L
    Vehicle 2.0 EcoBlue
    Trunk space 300 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 32 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 4.3x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 150x
    Difference with world average -178L

    Quick notes on Ford Galaxy trunk space

      • Trunk capacity for generation: 308 L
      • Amount of carry-on suitcases: 6.8 pcs
      • Amount of average suitcases: 3.1 pcs
      • Trunk space per 1 passenger: 44 L
      • Max trunk load: 101 kg
      • Interior transformation: flexible
      • Horsepower to trunk space: 2.1 L to 1 hp
      • Torque to trunk capacity: 1.1 to 1 Nm
      • Trunkley rating: 4 / 10

    Trunk space to engine power ratio

  • 1.8 TDCi : 2.5 L/hp (3.3 L/kW)
  • 2.0 i 16V : 2.1 L/hp (2.9 L/kW)
  • 2.0 TDCi : 2.2 L/hp (3 L/kW)
  • 2.0 : 2.1 L/hp (2.9 L/kW)
  • 2.2 TDCi : 1.8 L/hp (2.4 L/kW)
  • 2.3 i 16V : 1.9 L/hp (2.6 L/kW)

    Trunk size and maximum speed comparison

  • 1.8 TDCi : 1.65 L/km-h (1.03 L/mph)
  • 2.0 i 16V : 1.59 L/km-h (0.99 L/mph)
  • 2.0 TDCi : 1.6 L/km-h (0.99 L/mph)
  • 2.0 : 1.62 L/km-h (1.01 L/mph)
  • 2.2 TDCi : 1.48 L/km-h (0.92 L/mph)
  • 2.3 i 16V : 1.61 L/km-h (1 L/mph)

    Trunk capacity to fuel consumption ratio

  • 2.0 : 41.6x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.2 TDCi : 46x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.3 i 16V : 31.4x (Trunk/Consumption)

    • Vehicle Trunk space Trunk to acceleration ratio Trunk space to tank size Trunk space to engine capacity Difference with world average
    1.8 TDCi 308 L 27 L to 1 s 4.4x 176x -170L
    2.0 i 16V 308 L 29 L to 1 s 4.4x 154x -170L
    2.0 TDCi 308 L 31 L to 1 s 4.4x 154x -170L
    2.0 308 L 31 L to 1 s 4.4x 154x -170L
    2.2 TDCi 308 L 34 L to 1 s 4.4x 141x -170L
    2.3 i 16V 308 L 28 L to 1 s 4.4x 136x -170L
    Vehicle 1.8 TDCi
    Trunk space 308 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 27 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 4.4x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 176x
    Difference with world average -170L
    Vehicle 2.0 i 16V
    Trunk space 308 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 29 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 4.4x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 154x
    Difference with world average -170L
    Vehicle 2.0 TDCi
    Trunk space 308 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 31 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 4.4x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 154x
    Difference with world average -170L
    Vehicle 2.0
    Trunk space 308 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 31 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 4.4x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 154x
    Difference with world average -170L
    Vehicle 2.2 TDCi
    Trunk space 308 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 34 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 4.4x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 141x
    Difference with world average -170L
    Vehicle 2.3 i 16V
    Trunk space 308 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 28 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 4.4x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 136x
    Difference with world average -170L

    Quick notes on Ford Galaxy trunk space

      • Trunk capacity for generation: 298 L
      • Amount of carry-on suitcases: 6.6 pcs
      • Amount of average suitcases: 3 pcs
      • Trunk space per 1 passenger: 42.6 L
      • Max trunk load: 103 kg
      • Interior transformation: flexible
      • Horsepower to trunk space: 1.9 L to 1 hp
      • Torque to trunk capacity: 1.3 to 1 Nm
      • Trunkley rating: 4 / 10

    Trunk space to engine power ratio

  • 2.8i V6 : 1.5 L/hp (2.1 L/kW)
  • 1.9 TDI : 2.5 L/hp (3.4 L/kW)
  • 2.3 16V : 2.3 L/hp (3.1 L/kW)
  • 2.8 V6 : 1.6 L/hp (2.2 L/kW)
  • 2.0 i : 2.3 L/hp (3.1 L/kW)
  • 2.8i V6 4x4 : 1.5 L/hp (2.1 L/kW)

    Trunk size and maximum speed comparison

  • 2.8i V6 : 1.34 L/km-h (0.83 L/mph)
  • 1.9 TDI : 1.76 L/km-h (1.09 L/mph)
  • 2.3 16V : 1.73 L/km-h (1.08 L/mph)
  • 2.8 V6 : 1.52 L/km-h (0.94 L/mph)
  • 2.0 i : 1.5 L/km-h (0.93 L/mph)
  • 2.8i V6 4x4 : 1.38 L/km-h (0.86 L/mph)

    Trunk capacity to fuel consumption ratio

  • 1.9 TDI : 50.8x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.3 16V : 32.7x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.8 V6 : 30.6x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.0 i : 26.3x (Trunk/Consumption)

    • Vehicle Trunk space Trunk to acceleration ratio Trunk space to tank size Trunk space to engine capacity Difference with world average
    2.8i V6 266 L 27 L to 1 s 3.5x 95x -212L
    1.9 TDI 330 L 27 L to 1 s 4.7x 174x -148L
    2.3 16V 330 L 27 L to 1 s 4.7x 144x -148L
    2.8 V6 330 L 35 L to 1 s 4.7x 118x -148L
    2.0 i 266 L 21 L to 1 s 3.8x 133x -212L
    2.8i V6 4x4 266 L 24 L to 1 s 3.5x 95x -212L
    Vehicle 2.8i V6
    Trunk space 266 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 27 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 3.5x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 95x
    Difference with world average -212L
    Vehicle 1.9 TDI
    Trunk space 330 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 27 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 4.7x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 174x
    Difference with world average -148L
    Vehicle 2.3 16V
    Trunk space 330 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 27 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 4.7x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 144x
    Difference with world average -148L
    Vehicle 2.8 V6
    Trunk space 330 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 35 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 4.7x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 118x
    Difference with world average -148L
    Vehicle 2.0 i
    Trunk space 266 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 21 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 3.8x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 133x
    Difference with world average -212L
    Vehicle 2.8i V6 4x4
    Trunk space 266 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 24 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 3.5x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 95x
    Difference with world average -212L