Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.6 | 184 L | 13 L to 1 s | 3.3x | 116x | -294L |
2.4 | 398 L | 35 L to 1 s | 6x | 166x | -80L |
Vehicle | 1.6 |
---|---|
Trunk space | 184 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 13 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 3.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 116x |
Difference with world average | -294L |
Vehicle | 2.4 |
Trunk space | 398 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 35 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 166x |
Difference with world average | -80L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.6 i 16V | 398 L | 31 L to 1 s | 7.2x | 251x | -80L |
Vehicle | 1.6 i 16V |
---|---|
Trunk space | 398 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 31 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 251x |
Difference with world average | -80L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.5 i V6 | 258 L | 25 L to 1 s | 3.9x | 103x | -220L |
1.6 i 16V | 210 L | 17 L to 1 s | 3.8x | 132x | -268L |
2.0 TD | 258 L | 14 L to 1 s | 3.9x | 129x | -220L |
2.0 TD Intercooler | 258 L | - | 4.6x | 129x | -220L |
Vehicle | 2.5 i V6 |
---|---|
Trunk space | 258 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 25 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 3.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 103x |
Difference with world average | -220L |
Vehicle | 1.6 i 16V |
Trunk space | 210 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 17 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 3.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 132x |
Difference with world average | -268L |
Vehicle | 2.0 TD |
Trunk space | 258 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 14 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 3.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 129x |
Difference with world average | -220L |
Vehicle | 2.0 TD Intercooler |
Trunk space | 258 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 4.6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 129x |
Difference with world average | -220L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.7 i V6 | 187 L | 19 L to 1 s | 2.9x | 68x | -291L |
Vehicle | 2.7 i V6 |
---|---|
Trunk space | 187 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 19 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 2.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 68x |
Difference with world average | -291L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.6 i | 210 L | 17 L to 1 s | 3.8x | 132x | -268L |
2.0 i 16V | 210 L | 19 L to 1 s | 3.8x | 105x | -268L |
Vehicle | 1.6 i |
---|---|
Trunk space | 210 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 17 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 3.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 132x |
Difference with world average | -268L |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V |
Trunk space | 210 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 19 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 3.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 105x |
Difference with world average | -268L |