Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 16V | 477 L | 54 L to 1 s | 6.8x | 239x | -1L |
2.0 dCi | 477 L | 49 L to 1 s | 6.8x | 239x | -1L |
2.0 dCi 16V | 477 L | 51 L to 1 s | 6.8x | 239x | -1L |
3.0 V6 dCi | 477 L | 66 L to 1 s | 6.8x | 159x | -1L |
2.0 | 477 L | 42 L to 1 s | 6.8x | 239x | -1L |
2.5 V6 | 477 L | 47 L to 1 s | 6.8x | 191x | -1L |
3.5 V6 | 477 L | 78 L to 1 s | 6.8x | 136x | -1L |
Vehicle | 2.0 16V |
---|---|
Trunk space | 477 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 54 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 239x |
Difference with world average | -1L |
Vehicle | 2.0 dCi |
Trunk space | 477 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 49 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 239x |
Difference with world average | -1L |
Vehicle | 2.0 dCi 16V |
Trunk space | 477 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 51 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 239x |
Difference with world average | -1L |
Vehicle | 3.0 V6 dCi |
Trunk space | 477 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 66 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 159x |
Difference with world average | -1L |
Vehicle | 2.0 |
Trunk space | 477 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 42 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 239x |
Difference with world average | -1L |
Vehicle | 2.5 V6 |
Trunk space | 477 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 47 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 191x |
Difference with world average | -1L |
Vehicle | 3.5 V6 |
Trunk space | 477 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 78 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 136x |
Difference with world average | -1L |