Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 T2 | 236 L | 24 L to 1 s | 3.8x | 120x | -242L |
1.5 T2 | 324 L | 35 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 216x | -154L |
2.0 D3 | 236 L | 29 L to 1 s | 3.8x | 120x | -242L |
2.0 D2 | 236 L | 23 L to 1 s | 3.8x | 120x | -242L |
2.0 D4 | 335 L | 49 L to 1 s | 8.4x | 170x | -143L |
2.0 T3 | 324 L | 38 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 165x | -154L |
2.0 T4 | 324 L | 49 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 165x | -154L |
2.0 T5 | 324 L | 54 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 165x | -154L |
1.5 T3 | 324 L | 41 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 216x | -154L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T2 |
---|---|
Trunk space | 236 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 24 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 3.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 120x |
Difference with world average | -242L |
Vehicle | 1.5 T2 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 35 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 216x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 2.0 D3 |
Trunk space | 236 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 29 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 3.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 120x |
Difference with world average | -242L |
Vehicle | 2.0 D2 |
Trunk space | 236 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 23 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 3.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 120x |
Difference with world average | -242L |
Vehicle | 2.0 D4 |
Trunk space | 335 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 49 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.4x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 170x |
Difference with world average | -143L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T3 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 38 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 165x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T4 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 49 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 165x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T5 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 54 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 165x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 1.5 T3 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 41 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 216x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 T3 | 324 L | 40 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 165x | -154L |
2.0 D4 | 324 L | 46 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 165x | -154L |
1.5 T3 | 324 L | 40 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 216x | -154L |
2.0 D2 | 324 L | 32 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 165x | -154L |
2.0 T4 | 324 L | 46 L to 1 s | 5.7x | 165x | -154L |
2.0 D3 | 324 L | 40 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 165x | -154L |
2.0 T5 | 324 L | 56 L to 1 s | 5.7x | 165x | -154L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T3 |
---|---|
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 40 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 165x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 2.0 D4 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 46 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 165x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 1.5 T3 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 40 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 216x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 2.0 D2 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 32 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 165x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T4 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 46 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.7x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 165x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 2.0 D3 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 40 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 165x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T5 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 56 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.7x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 165x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 T5 | 335 L | 49 L to 1 s | 5.9x | 169x | -143L |
1.5 T3 | 324 L | 40 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 216x | -154L |
2.0 D2 | 324 L | 32 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 165x | -154L |
2.0 T3 | 324 L | 40 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 165x | -154L |
1.6 T4 | 335 L | 46 L to 1 s | 5.4x | 210x | -143L |
2.5 T5 | 335 L | 55 L to 1 s | 5.9x | 134x | -143L |
1.6 D2 | 324 L | 28 L to 1 s | 6.2x | 208x | -154L |
2.0 D3 | 335 L | 38 L to 1 s | 5.6x | 169x | -143L |
2.0 D4 | 335 L | 42 L to 1 s | 5.6x | 169x | -143L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T5 |
---|---|
Trunk space | 335 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 49 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 169x |
Difference with world average | -143L |
Vehicle | 1.5 T3 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 40 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 216x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 2.0 D2 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 32 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 165x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T3 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 40 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 165x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 1.6 T4 |
Trunk space | 335 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 46 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.4x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 210x |
Difference with world average | -143L |
Vehicle | 2.5 T5 |
Trunk space | 335 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 55 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 134x |
Difference with world average | -143L |
Vehicle | 1.6 D2 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 28 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 208x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 2.0 D3 |
Trunk space | 335 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 38 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 169x |
Difference with world average | -143L |
Vehicle | 2.0 D4 |
Trunk space | 335 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 42 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 169x |
Difference with world average | -143L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 T2 | 324 L | 35 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 165x | -154L |
2.0 D2 | 335 L | 33 L to 1 s | 8.4x | 170x | -143L |
1.5 T2 | 324 L | 35 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 216x | -154L |
2.0 T3 | 324 L | 41 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 165x | -154L |
1.5 T3 | 324 L | 41 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 216x | -154L |
2.0 T5 | 324 L | 54 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 165x | -154L |
1.6 D2 | 335 L | 29 L to 1 s | 6.4x | 215x | -143L |
2.0 D3 | 496 L | 56 L to 1 s | 8.3x | 250x | +18L |
2.0 D4 | 496 L | 60 L to 1 s | 8.3x | 250x | +18L |
1.6 T3 | 324 L | 39 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 203x | -154L |
1.6 T4 | 324 L | 40 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 203x | -154L |
2.5 T5 | 324 L | 56 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 130x | -154L |
1.6 T2 | 324 L | 34 L to 1 s | 5.2x | 203x | -154L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T2 |
---|---|
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 35 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 165x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 2.0 D2 |
Trunk space | 335 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 33 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.4x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 170x |
Difference with world average | -143L |
Vehicle | 1.5 T2 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 35 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 216x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T3 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 41 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 165x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 1.5 T3 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 41 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 216x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T5 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 54 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 165x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 1.6 D2 |
Trunk space | 335 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 29 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.4x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 215x |
Difference with world average | -143L |
Vehicle | 2.0 D3 |
Trunk space | 496 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 56 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 250x |
Difference with world average | +18L |
Vehicle | 2.0 D4 |
Trunk space | 496 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 60 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.3x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 250x |
Difference with world average | +18L |
Vehicle | 1.6 T3 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 39 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 203x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 1.6 T4 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 40 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 203x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 2.5 T5 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 56 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 130x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | 1.6 T2 |
Trunk space | 324 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 34 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 5.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 203x |
Difference with world average | -154L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 16V | 470 L | 51 L to 1 s | 7.8x | 241x | -8L |
1.8 16V | 413 L | 41 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 239x | -65L |
2.0 T | 470 L | 58 L to 1 s | 7.8x | 241x | -8L |
1.6 16V | 470 L | 41 L to 1 s | 7.8x | 296x | -8L |
1.8 GDI | 413 L | 41 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 225x | -65L |
1.9 D | 413 L | 41 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 221x | -65L |
2.0 T4 | 471 L | 68 L to 1 s | 7.9x | 242x | -7L |
1.9 TD | 471 L | 38 L to 1 s | 7.9x | 252x | -7L |
Vehicle | 2.0 16V |
---|---|
Trunk space | 470 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 51 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 241x |
Difference with world average | -8L |
Vehicle | 1.8 16V |
Trunk space | 413 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 41 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 239x |
Difference with world average | -65L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T |
Trunk space | 470 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 58 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 241x |
Difference with world average | -8L |
Vehicle | 1.6 16V |
Trunk space | 470 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 41 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.8x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 296x |
Difference with world average | -8L |
Vehicle | 1.8 GDI |
Trunk space | 413 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 41 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 225x |
Difference with world average | -65L |
Vehicle | 1.9 D |
Trunk space | 413 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 41 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 221x |
Difference with world average | -65L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T4 |
Trunk space | 471 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 68 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 242x |
Difference with world average | -7L |
Vehicle | 1.9 TD |
Trunk space | 471 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 38 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 252x |
Difference with world average | -7L |