Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.3 V6 | 440 L | 64 L to 1 s | 7.9x | 133x | -38L |
3.5 V6 24V | 440 L | 58 L to 1 s | 6.1x | 127x | -38L |
3.0 V6 24V | 440 L | - | 6.1x | 147x | -38L |
2.4 16V | 440 L | - | 6.1x | 186x | -38L |
Vehicle | 3.3 V6 |
---|---|
Trunk space | 440 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 64 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 133x |
Difference with world average | -38L |
Vehicle | 3.5 V6 24V |
Trunk space | 440 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 58 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.1x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 127x |
Difference with world average | -38L |
Vehicle | 3.0 V6 24V |
Trunk space | 440 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.1x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 147x |
Difference with world average | -38L |
Vehicle | 2.4 16V |
Trunk space | 440 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.1x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 186x |
Difference with world average | -38L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.0 V6 24V | 860 L | - | 11.5x | 287x | +382L |
2.4 16V | 860 L | - | 11.5x | 364x | +382L |
2.2i 16V | 860 L | 73 L to 1 s | 11.5x | 398x | +382L |
Vehicle | 3.0 V6 24V |
---|---|
Trunk space | 860 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 11.5x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 287x |
Difference with world average | +382L |
Vehicle | 2.4 16V |
Trunk space | 860 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 11.5x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 364x |
Difference with world average | +382L |
Vehicle | 2.2i 16V |
Trunk space | 860 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 73 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 11.5x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 398x |
Difference with world average | +382L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.2i 16V | 860 L | - | 13.2x | 397x | +382L |
2.4 16V | 860 L | 75 L to 1 s | 13.2x | 364x | +382L |
3.0 V6 24V | 860 L | 106 L to 1 s | 13.2x | 287x | +382L |
Vehicle | 2.2i 16V |
---|---|
Trunk space | 860 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | - |
Trunk space to tank size | 13.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 397x |
Difference with world average | +382L |
Vehicle | 2.4 16V |
Trunk space | 860 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 75 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 13.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 364x |
Difference with world average | +382L |
Vehicle | 3.0 V6 24V |
Trunk space | 860 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 106 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 13.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 287x |
Difference with world average | +382L |