Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0d | 540 L | 87 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 270x | +62L |
3.0d V6 | 505 L | 86 L to 1 s | 7.7x | 169x | +27L |
S 3.0 V6 | 505 L | 101 L to 1 s | 6.8x | 169x | +27L |
3.0 V6 | 505 L | 99 L to 1 s | 6.8x | 169x | +27L |
2.0 | 540 L | 98 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 270x | +62L |
Vehicle | 2.0d |
---|---|
Trunk space | 540 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 87 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 270x |
Difference with world average | +62L |
Vehicle | 3.0d V6 |
Trunk space | 505 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 86 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.7x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 169x |
Difference with world average | +27L |
Vehicle | S 3.0 V6 |
Trunk space | 505 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 101 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 169x |
Difference with world average | +27L |
Vehicle | 3.0 V6 |
Trunk space | 505 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 99 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 169x |
Difference with world average | +27L |
Vehicle | 2.0 |
Trunk space | 540 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 98 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 270x |
Difference with world average | +62L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0d | 565 L | 66 L to 1 s | 8.6x | 283x | +87L |
3.0 V6 | 565 L | 109 L to 1 s | 7.6x | 189x | +87L |
2.0 | 565 L | 84 L to 1 s | 7.6x | 283x | +87L |
3.0d V6 | 565 L | 90 L to 1 s | 8.6x | 189x | +87L |
Vehicle | 2.0d |
---|---|
Trunk space | 565 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 66 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 283x |
Difference with world average | +87L |
Vehicle | 3.0 V6 |
Trunk space | 565 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 109 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 189x |
Difference with world average | +87L |
Vehicle | 2.0 |
Trunk space | 565 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 84 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 283x |
Difference with world average | +87L |
Vehicle | 3.0d V6 |
Trunk space | 565 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 90 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 189x |
Difference with world average | +87L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.2d | 550 L | 65 L to 1 s | 7.8x | 252x | +72L |
3.0d | 550 L | 87 L to 1 s | 7.8x | 184x | +72L |
Vehicle | 2.2d |
---|---|
Trunk space | 550 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 65 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 252x |
Difference with world average | +72L |
Vehicle | 3.0d |
Trunk space | 550 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 87 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 184x |
Difference with world average | +72L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 | 540 L | 72 L to 1 s | 7.7x | 270x | +62L |
2.2d | 540 L | 67 L to 1 s | 7.7x | 248x | +62L |
3.0 V6 | 923 L | 117 L to 1 s | 14.4x | 311x | +445L |
R-S 5.0 V8 | 540 L | 123 L to 1 s | 7.7x | 108x | +62L |
3.0d V6 | 540 L | 89 L to 1 s | 7.7x | 180x | +62L |
5.0 V8 | 923 L | 171 L to 1 s | 14.4x | 185x | +445L |
R 5.0 V8 | 540 L | 115 L to 1 s | 7.7x | 108x | +62L |
Vehicle | 2.0 |
---|---|
Trunk space | 540 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 72 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.7x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 270x |
Difference with world average | +62L |
Vehicle | 2.2d |
Trunk space | 540 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 67 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.7x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 248x |
Difference with world average | +62L |
Vehicle | 3.0 V6 |
Trunk space | 923 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 117 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 14.4x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 311x |
Difference with world average | +445L |
Vehicle | R-S 5.0 V8 |
Trunk space | 540 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 123 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.7x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 108x |
Difference with world average | +62L |
Vehicle | 3.0d V6 |
Trunk space | 540 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 89 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.7x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 180x |
Difference with world average | +62L |
Vehicle | 5.0 V8 |
Trunk space | 923 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 171 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 14.4x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 185x |
Difference with world average | +445L |
Vehicle | R 5.0 V8 |
Trunk space | 540 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 115 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.7x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 108x |
Difference with world average | +62L |