Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.8 t Biopower | 425 L | 53 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 237x | -53L |
1.9 TTiD | 425 L | 52 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 223x | -53L |
2.0 t Biopower | 425 L | 57 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 214x | -53L |
2.8 i V6 24V | 425 L | 60 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 152x | -53L |
Vehicle | 1.8 t Biopower |
---|---|
Trunk space | 425 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 53 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 237x |
Difference with world average | -53L |
Vehicle | 1.9 TTiD |
Trunk space | 425 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 52 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 223x |
Difference with world average | -53L |
Vehicle | 2.0 t Biopower |
Trunk space | 425 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 57 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 214x |
Difference with world average | -53L |
Vehicle | 2.8 i V6 24V |
Trunk space | 425 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 60 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 152x |
Difference with world average | -53L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.8 i 16V | 425 L | 39 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 237x | -53L |
1.9 TiD | 425 L | 47 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 223x | -53L |
2.0 i 16V t | 425 L | 49 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 213x | -53L |
2.0 t | 425 L | 46 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 213x | -53L |
2.0 T | 425 L | 49 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 213x | -53L |
2.2 TiD | 425 L | 40 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 196x | -53L |
2.8 i V6 24V | 425 L | 57 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 152x | -53L |
Vehicle | 1.8 i 16V |
---|---|
Trunk space | 425 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 39 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 237x |
Difference with world average | -53L |
Vehicle | 1.9 TiD |
Trunk space | 425 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 47 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 223x |
Difference with world average | -53L |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V t |
Trunk space | 425 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 49 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 213x |
Difference with world average | -53L |
Vehicle | 2.0 t |
Trunk space | 425 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 46 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 213x |
Difference with world average | -53L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T |
Trunk space | 425 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 49 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 213x |
Difference with world average | -53L |
Vehicle | 2.2 TiD |
Trunk space | 425 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 40 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 196x |
Difference with world average | -53L |
Vehicle | 2.8 i V6 24V |
Trunk space | 425 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 57 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 152x |
Difference with world average | -53L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.8 i 16V | 419 L | 39 L to 1 s | 6.8x | 210x | -59L |
1.9 TiD | 419 L | 43 L to 1 s | 6.8x | 219x | -59L |
1.8 i 16V Bio | 419 L | 46 L to 1 s | 6.8x | 233x | -59L |
1.9 TTiD | 419 L | 48 L to 1 s | 6.8x | 219x | -59L |
2.0 i 16V Bio | 419 L | 48 L to 1 s | 6.8x | 211x | -59L |
2.0 i 16V t | 419 L | 49 L to 1 s | 6.8x | 210x | -59L |
2.0 i 16V T | 419 L | 49 L to 1 s | 6.8x | 210x | -59L |
2.8 i V6 | 419 L | 59 L to 1 s | 6.8x | 150x | -59L |
2.8 i V6 24V | 419 L | 57 L to 1 s | 6.8x | 150x | -59L |
Vehicle | 1.8 i 16V |
---|---|
Trunk space | 419 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 39 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 210x |
Difference with world average | -59L |
Vehicle | 1.9 TiD |
Trunk space | 419 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 43 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 219x |
Difference with world average | -59L |
Vehicle | 1.8 i 16V Bio |
Trunk space | 419 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 46 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 233x |
Difference with world average | -59L |
Vehicle | 1.9 TTiD |
Trunk space | 419 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 48 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 219x |
Difference with world average | -59L |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V Bio |
Trunk space | 419 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 48 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 211x |
Difference with world average | -59L |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V t |
Trunk space | 419 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 49 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 210x |
Difference with world average | -59L |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V T |
Trunk space | 419 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 49 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 210x |
Difference with world average | -59L |
Vehicle | 2.8 i V6 |
Trunk space | 419 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 59 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 150x |
Difference with world average | -59L |
Vehicle | 2.8 i V6 24V |
Trunk space | 419 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 57 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 150x |
Difference with world average | -59L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 t | 235 L | 24 L to 1 s | 3.8x | 118x | -243L |
2.0 T | 235 L | 31 L to 1 s | 3.8x | 118x | -243L |
2.8 V6 Turbo | 235 L | 31 L to 1 s | 3.8x | 84x | -243L |
Vehicle | 2.0 t |
---|---|
Trunk space | 235 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 24 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 3.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 118x |
Difference with world average | -243L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T |
Trunk space | 235 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 31 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 3.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 118x |
Difference with world average | -243L |
Vehicle | 2.8 V6 Turbo |
Trunk space | 235 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 31 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 3.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 84x |
Difference with world average | -243L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 T | 494 L | 72 L to 1 s | 7.7x | 249x | +16L |
2.0i | 494 L | 47 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 249x | +16L |
2.0i SE | 494 L | 47 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 249x | +16L |
2.0 i T | 494 L | 61 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 249x | +16L |
2.0 i T SE | 494 L | 61 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 249x | +16L |
2.0 i TS | 494 L | 72 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 249x | +16L |
2.2 TiD | 494 L | 50 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 228x | +16L |
2.3 i T SE | 494 L | 47 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 216x | +16L |
2.3 i | 494 L | 52 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 216x | +16L |
2.3 T | 494 L | 76 L to 1 s | 7.7x | 216x | +16L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T |
---|---|
Trunk space | 494 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 72 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.7x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 249x |
Difference with world average | +16L |
Vehicle | 2.0i |
Trunk space | 494 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 47 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 249x |
Difference with world average | +16L |
Vehicle | 2.0i SE |
Trunk space | 494 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 47 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 249x |
Difference with world average | +16L |
Vehicle | 2.0 i T |
Trunk space | 494 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 61 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 249x |
Difference with world average | +16L |
Vehicle | 2.0 i T SE |
Trunk space | 494 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 61 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 249x |
Difference with world average | +16L |
Vehicle | 2.0 i TS |
Trunk space | 494 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 72 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 249x |
Difference with world average | +16L |
Vehicle | 2.2 TiD |
Trunk space | 494 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 50 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 228x |
Difference with world average | +16L |
Vehicle | 2.3 i T SE |
Trunk space | 494 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 47 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 216x |
Difference with world average | +16L |
Vehicle | 2.3 i |
Trunk space | 494 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 52 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 216x |
Difference with world average | +16L |
Vehicle | 2.3 T |
Trunk space | 494 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 76 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.7x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 216x |
Difference with world average | +16L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 T | 295 L | 43 L to 1 s | 4.6x | 149x | -183L |
2.3 T | 295 L | 45 L to 1 s | 4.6x | 129x | -183L |
2.3i | 295 L | 31 L to 1 s | 4.3x | 129x | -183L |
2.3 i SE | 295 L | 28 L to 1 s | 4.3x | 129x | -183L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T |
---|---|
Trunk space | 295 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 43 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 4.6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 149x |
Difference with world average | -183L |
Vehicle | 2.3 T |
Trunk space | 295 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 45 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 4.6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 129x |
Difference with world average | -183L |
Vehicle | 2.3i |
Trunk space | 295 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 31 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 4.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 129x |
Difference with world average | -183L |
Vehicle | 2.3 i SE |
Trunk space | 295 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 28 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 4.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 129x |
Difference with world average | -183L |