Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.3 | 714 L | - | 12.1x | 316x | +236L |
2.0 | 714 L | - | 12.1x | 357x | +236L |
Vehicle | 2.3 |
---|---|
Trunk space | 714 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 12.1x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 316x |
Difference with world average | +236L |
Vehicle | 2.0 |
Trunk space | 714 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 12.1x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 357x |
Difference with world average | +236L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 GTDI | 799 L | - | 13.8x | 400x | +321L |
2.3 GTDI | 799 L | - | 13.8x | 353x | +321L |
Vehicle | 2.0 GTDI |
---|---|
Trunk space | 799 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 13.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 400x |
Difference with world average | +321L |
Vehicle | 2.3 GTDI |
Trunk space | 799 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 13.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 353x |
Difference with world average | +321L |