Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
EcoBoost 180 | 534 L | 53 L to 1 s | 8.3x | 356x | +56L |
EcoBoost 245 | 534 L | 71 L to 1 s | 8.3x | 267x | +56L |
EcoBoost 325 V6 | 534 L | 81 L to 1 s | 8.3x | 198x | +56L |
Vehicle | EcoBoost 180 |
---|---|
Trunk space | 534 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 53 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 356x |
Difference with world average | +56L |
Vehicle | EcoBoost 245 |
Trunk space | 534 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 71 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 267x |
Difference with world average | +56L |
Vehicle | EcoBoost 325 V6 |
Trunk space | 534 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 81 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 198x |
Difference with world average | +56L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
SHO 3.5 V6 | 569 L | - | 7.9x | 163x | +91L |
3.5 V6 24V | 569 L | - | 7.9x | 163x | +91L |
2.0 EcoBoost | 569 L | - | 7.9x | 285x | +91L |
Vehicle | SHO 3.5 V6 |
---|---|
Trunk space | 569 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 163x |
Difference with world average | +91L |
Vehicle | 3.5 V6 24V |
Trunk space | 569 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 163x |
Difference with world average | +91L |
Vehicle | 2.0 EcoBoost |
Trunk space | 569 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 285x |
Difference with world average | +91L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.5 V6 24V | 569 L | - | 7.9x | 163x | +91L |
SHO 3.5 V6 | 569 L | - | 7.9x | 163x | +91L |
Vehicle | 3.5 V6 24V |
---|---|
Trunk space | 569 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 163x |
Difference with world average | +91L |
Vehicle | SHO 3.5 V6 |
Trunk space | 569 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 163x |
Difference with world average | +91L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.5 V6 24V | 600 L | - | 7.9x | 172x | +122L |
Vehicle | 3.5 V6 24V |
---|---|
Trunk space | 600 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 172x |
Difference with world average | +122L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.0 V6 24V | 481 L | - | 7.1x | 162x | +3L |
3.0 V6 | 481 L | - | 7.1x | 161x | +3L |
Vehicle | 3.0 V6 24V |
---|---|
Trunk space | 481 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.1x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 162x |
Difference with world average | +3L |
Vehicle | 3.0 V6 |
Trunk space | 481 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.1x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 161x |
Difference with world average | +3L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.0 V6 | 447 L | 44 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 150x | -31L |
3.0 V6 24V | 447 L | 47 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 151x | -31L |
SHO 3.4 V8 32V | 447 L | - | 7.3x | 132x | -31L |
Vehicle | 3.0 V6 |
---|---|
Trunk space | 447 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 44 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 150x |
Difference with world average | -31L |
Vehicle | 3.0 V6 24V |
Trunk space | 447 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 47 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 151x |
Difference with world average | -31L |
Vehicle | SHO 3.4 V8 32V |
Trunk space | 447 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 132x |
Difference with world average | -31L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.8 V6 | 507 L | - | 8.3x | 134x | +29L |
SHO 3.2 V6 24V5 | 507 L | 63 L to 1 s | 7.2x | 159x | +29L |
SHO 3.0 V6 24V5 | 507 L | - | 7.2x | 170x | +29L |
3.0 V6 | 507 L | - | 8.3x | 170x | +29L |
Vehicle | 3.8 V6 |
---|---|
Trunk space | 507 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 134x |
Difference with world average | +29L |
Vehicle | SHO 3.2 V6 24V5 |
Trunk space | 507 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 63 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 159x |
Difference with world average | +29L |
Vehicle | SHO 3.0 V6 24V5 |
Trunk space | 507 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 170x |
Difference with world average | +29L |
Vehicle | 3.0 V6 |
Trunk space | 507 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 170x |
Difference with world average | +29L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.5 | 481 L | - | 7.9x | 193x | +3L |
3.8 V6 | 481 L | - | 7.9x | 127x | +3L |
3.0 V6 | 481 L | - | 7.9x | 161x | +3L |
Vehicle | 2.5 |
---|---|
Trunk space | 481 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 193x |
Difference with world average | +3L |
Vehicle | 3.8 V6 |
Trunk space | 481 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 127x |
Difference with world average | +3L |
Vehicle | 3.0 V6 |
Trunk space | 481 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 161x |
Difference with world average | +3L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.5i | 524 L | - | 8.6x | 210x | +46L |
SHO 3.0 V6 | 481 L | 67 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 161x | +3L |
3.8 V6 | 524 L | 61 L to 1 s | 8.6x | 138x | +46L |
3.0 V6 | 524 L | - | 8.6x | 175x | +46L |
Vehicle | 2.5i |
---|---|
Trunk space | 524 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 210x |
Difference with world average | +46L |
Vehicle | SHO 3.0 V6 |
Trunk space | 481 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 67 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 161x |
Difference with world average | +3L |
Vehicle | 3.8 V6 |
Trunk space | 524 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 61 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 138x |
Difference with world average | +46L |
Vehicle | 3.0 V6 |
Trunk space | 524 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 175x |
Difference with world average | +46L |