Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.5 - 24 V6 | 494 L | 57 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 198x | +16L |
2.0 - 16 Turbo | 494 L | 61 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 249x | +16L |
2.0i | 494 L | 47 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 249x | +16L |
2.3 - 16 | 494 L | 52 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 216x | +16L |
Vehicle | 2.5 - 24 V6 |
---|---|
Trunk space | 494 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 57 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 198x |
Difference with world average | +16L |
Vehicle | 2.0 - 16 Turbo |
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 | 2.0i |
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 | 2.3 - 16 |
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 | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 - 16 Turbo | 295 L | 36 L to 1 s | 4.3x | 149x | -183L |
2.0i | 295 L | 28 L to 1 s | 4.3x | 149x | -183L |
2.3 - 16 | 295 L | 31 L to 1 s | 4.3x | 129x | -183L |
2.5 - 24 V6 | 295 L | 34 L to 1 s | 4.3x | 118x | -183L |
Vehicle | 2.0 - 16 Turbo |
---|---|
Trunk space | 295 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 36 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 4.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 149x |
Difference with world average | -183L |
Vehicle | 2.0i |
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 | 149x |
Difference with world average | -183L |
Vehicle | 2.3 - 16 |
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 | 2.5 - 24 V6 |
Trunk space | 295 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 34 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 4.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 118x |
Difference with world average | -183L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.3 -16 | 494 L | 52 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 216x | +16L |
2.0 - 16 Turbo | 494 L | 61 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 249x | +16L |
2.0i | 494 L | 47 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 249x | +16L |
2.5 24 V6 | 494 L | 57 L to 1 s | 7.3x | 198x | +16L |
Vehicle | 2.3 -16 |
---|---|
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 | 2.0 - 16 Turbo |
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 | 2.0i |
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 | 2.5 24 V6 |
Trunk space | 494 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 57 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 198x |
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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0i 16V | 600 L | 45 L to 1 s | 9.5x | 302x | +122L |
2.0 i 16V Turbo | 600 L | 72 L to 1 s | 9.5x | 302x | +122L |
2.0i 16V Turbo | 600 L | 48 L to 1 s | 9.5x | 302x | +122L |
2.1i 16V | 600 L | 48 L to 1 s | 9.5x | 283x | +122L |
Vehicle | 2.0i 16V |
---|---|
Trunk space | 600 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 45 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 9.5x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 302x |
Difference with world average | +122L |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V Turbo |
Trunk space | 600 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 72 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 9.5x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 302x |
Difference with world average | +122L |
Vehicle | 2.0i 16V Turbo |
Trunk space | 600 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 48 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 9.5x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 302x |
Difference with world average | +122L |
Vehicle | 2.1i 16V |
Trunk space | 600 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 48 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 9.5x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 283x |
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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0i 16V | 650 L | 49 L to 1 s | 10.3x | 327x | +172L |
2.0 i 16V Turbo | 650 L | 52 L to 1 s | 10.3x | 327x | +172L |
2.1i 16V | 650 L | 52 L to 1 s | 10.3x | 307x | +172L |
Vehicle | 2.0i 16V |
---|---|
Trunk space | 650 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 49 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 10.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 327x |
Difference with world average | +172L |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V Turbo |
Trunk space | 650 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 52 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 10.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 327x |
Difference with world average | +172L |
Vehicle | 2.1i 16V |
Trunk space | 650 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 52 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 10.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 307x |
Difference with world average | +172L |