Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.6 T4 | 555 L | 59 L to 1 s | 7.9x | 348x | +77L |
1.6 D2 | 555 L | 49 L to 1 s | 7.9x | 356x | +77L |
2.0 T5 | 555 L | 87 L to 1 s | 7.9x | 282x | +77L |
2.0 D3 | 555 L | 55 L to 1 s | 7.9x | 280x | +77L |
3.0 T6 | 555 L | 88 L to 1 s | 7.9x | 188x | +77L |
2.0 D4 | 555 L | 68 L to 1 s | 7.9x | 282x | +77L |
2.4 D4 | 555 L | 54 L to 1 s | 7.9x | 231x | +77L |
2.4 D5 | 555 L | 73 L to 1 s | 7.9x | 231x | +77L |
1.6 T4F | 555 L | 59 L to 1 s | 7.9x | 348x | +77L |
Vehicle | 1.6 T4 |
---|---|
Trunk space | 555 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 59 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 348x |
Difference with world average | +77L |
Vehicle | 1.6 D2 |
Trunk space | 555 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 49 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 356x |
Difference with world average | +77L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T5 |
Trunk space | 555 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 87 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 282x |
Difference with world average | +77L |
Vehicle | 2.0 D3 |
Trunk space | 555 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 55 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 280x |
Difference with world average | +77L |
Vehicle | 3.0 T6 |
Trunk space | 555 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 88 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 188x |
Difference with world average | +77L |
Vehicle | 2.0 D4 |
Trunk space | 555 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 68 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 282x |
Difference with world average | +77L |
Vehicle | 2.4 D4 |
Trunk space | 555 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 54 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 231x |
Difference with world average | +77L |
Vehicle | 2.4 D5 |
Trunk space | 555 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 73 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 231x |
Difference with world average | +77L |
Vehicle | 1.6 T4F |
Trunk space | 555 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 59 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 348x |
Difference with world average | +77L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 T | 575 L | 73 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 288x | +97L |
2.4d | 575 L | 67 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 239x | +97L |
2.0F | 575 L | 54 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 288x | +97L |
1.6 T4 | 575 L | 61 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 361x | +97L |
2.4 D5 | 575 L | 74 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 240x | +97L |
2.0 | 575 L | 54 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 288x | +97L |
3.2 | 575 L | 72 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 180x | +97L |
2.4 D | 575 L | 64 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 240x | +97L |
2.5FT | 575 L | 79 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 228x | +97L |
1.6 T4F | 575 L | 61 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 360x | +97L |
1.6 DRIVe | 575 L | 47 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 369x | +97L |
2.4D | 575 L | 58 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 240x | +97L |
2.5 T | 575 L | 71 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 228x | +97L |
2.0 T5 | 575 L | 79 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 288x | +97L |
2.0 D3 | 575 L | 61 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 290x | +97L |
2.0D | 575 L | 55 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 288x | +97L |
3.0 T6 | 575 L | 87 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 195x | +97L |
3.0i T6 | 575 L | 85 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 195x | +97L |
3.2i | 575 L | 72 L to 1 s | 8.2x | 180x | +97L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T |
---|---|
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 73 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 288x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | 2.4d |
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 67 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 239x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | 2.0F |
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 54 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 288x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | 1.6 T4 |
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 61 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 361x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | 2.4 D5 |
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 74 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 240x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | 2.0 |
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 54 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 288x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | 3.2 |
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 72 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 180x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | 2.4 D |
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 64 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 240x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | 2.5FT |
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 79 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 228x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | 1.6 T4F |
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 61 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 360x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | 1.6 DRIVe |
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 47 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 369x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | 2.4D |
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 58 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 240x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | 2.5 T |
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 71 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 228x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T5 |
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 79 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 288x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | 2.0 D3 |
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 61 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 290x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | 2.0D |
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 55 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 288x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | 3.0 T6 |
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 87 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 195x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | 3.0i T6 |
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 85 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 195x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | 3.2i |
Trunk space | 575 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 72 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 8.2x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 180x |
Difference with world average | +97L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.4i 20V T5 | 485 L | 75 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 202x | +7L |
2.4 D5 | 485 L | 57 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 202x | +7L |
Vehicle | 2.4i 20V T5 |
---|---|
Trunk space | 485 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 75 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 202x |
Difference with world average | +7L |
Vehicle | 2.4 D5 |
Trunk space | 485 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 57 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 202x |
Difference with world average | +7L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.4 T | 485 L | 65 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 199x | +7L |
2.4 | 485 L | 49 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 199x | +7L |
2.5i V20 | 485 L | 87 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 192x | +7L |
2.0 T | 550 L | 64 L to 1 s | 7.9x | 277x | +72L |
2.5i 20V | 485 L | 69 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 192x | +7L |
T5 | 485 L | 72 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 209x | +7L |
2.4 D | 485 L | 52 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 202x | +7L |
2.4 Bi-Fuel | 485 L | 49 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 199x | +7L |
2.5 TDI | 485 L | 48 L to 1 s | 6.9x | 197x | +7L |
Vehicle | 2.4 T |
---|---|
Trunk space | 485 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 65 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 199x |
Difference with world average | +7L |
Vehicle | 2.4 |
Trunk space | 485 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 49 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 199x |
Difference with world average | +7L |
Vehicle | 2.5i V20 |
Trunk space | 485 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 87 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 192x |
Difference with world average | +7L |
Vehicle | 2.0 T |
Trunk space | 550 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 64 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 7.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 277x |
Difference with world average | +72L |
Vehicle | 2.5i 20V |
Trunk space | 485 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 69 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 192x |
Difference with world average | +7L |
Vehicle | T5 |
Trunk space | 485 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 72 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 209x |
Difference with world average | +7L |
Vehicle | 2.4 D |
Trunk space | 485 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 52 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 202x |
Difference with world average | +7L |
Vehicle | 2.4 Bi-Fuel |
Trunk space | 485 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 49 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 199x |
Difference with world average | +7L |
Vehicle | 2.5 TDI |
Trunk space | 485 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 48 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6.9x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 197x |
Difference with world average | +7L |
Vehicle | Trunk space | Trunk to acceleration ratio | Trunk space to tank size | Trunk space to engine capacity | Difference with world average |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.5 TDI | 420 L | 43 L to 1 s | 6x | 171x | -58L |
2.3 Turbo | 420 L | 63 L to 1 s | 6x | 181x | -58L |
2.4i 20V | 420 L | 48 L to 1 s | 6x | 172x | -58L |
2.3 20V T-5 | 420 L | 55 L to 1 s | 6x | 181x | -58L |
2.5 | 420 L | 42 L to 1 s | 6x | 172x | -58L |
2.0 | 420 L | 37 L to 1 s | 6x | 212x | -58L |
2.0 20V Turbo | 420 L | 57 L to 1 s | 6x | 212x | -58L |
2.5 20V Turbo | 420 L | 55 L to 1 s | 6x | 172x | -58L |
2.0 20V | 420 L | 47 L to 1 s | 6x | 212x | -58L |
2.3 T | 420 L | 65 L to 1 s | 6x | 181x | -58L |
Vehicle | 2.5 TDI |
---|---|
Trunk space | 420 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 43 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 171x |
Difference with world average | -58L |
Vehicle | 2.3 Turbo |
Trunk space | 420 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 63 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 181x |
Difference with world average | -58L |
Vehicle | 2.4i 20V |
Trunk space | 420 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 48 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 172x |
Difference with world average | -58L |
Vehicle | 2.3 20V T-5 |
Trunk space | 420 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 55 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 181x |
Difference with world average | -58L |
Vehicle | 2.5 |
Trunk space | 420 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 42 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 172x |
Difference with world average | -58L |
Vehicle | 2.0 |
Trunk space | 420 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 37 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 212x |
Difference with world average | -58L |
Vehicle | 2.0 20V Turbo |
Trunk space | 420 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 57 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 212x |
Difference with world average | -58L |
Vehicle | 2.5 20V Turbo |
Trunk space | 420 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 55 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 172x |
Difference with world average | -58L |
Vehicle | 2.0 20V |
Trunk space | 420 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 47 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 212x |
Difference with world average | -58L |
Vehicle | 2.3 T |
Trunk space | 420 L |
Trunk to acceleration ratio | 65 L to 1 s |
Trunk space to tank size | 6x |
Trunk space to engine capacity | 181x |
Difference with world average | -58L |