Vehicle | Precise engine size | Difference from world average | Engine size to consumption ratio | Horsepower from 1 L | Engine size to 100 kg of weight |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.2 |
2.2 L (2198 cc) |
6.3% smaller | - | 60 hp from 1 L | 157 cc to 100 kg |
2.0 i 16V CDX |
2 L (1998 cc) |
14.8% smaller | 83 cc to 1 mpg | 67 hp from 1 L | 143 cc to 100 kg |
2.0 i |
2 L (1998 cc) |
14.8% smaller | 64 cc to 1 mpg | 58 hp from 1 L | 167 cc to 100 kg |
2.0 |
2 L (1998 cc) |
14.8% smaller | - | 68 hp from 1 L | 143 cc to 100 kg |
1.8 i |
1.8 L (1796 cc) |
23.4% smaller | - | 53 hp from 1 L | 138 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.2 |
---|---|
Precise engine size | 2.2 L (2198 cc) |
Difference from world average | 6.3 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | - |
Horsepower from 1 L | 60 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 157 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V CDX |
Precise engine size | 2 L (1998 cc) |
Difference from world average | 14.8 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 83 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 67 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 143 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 i |
Precise engine size | 2 L (1998 cc) |
Difference from world average | 14.8 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 64 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 58 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 167 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 |
Precise engine size | 2 L (1998 cc) |
Difference from world average | 14.8 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | - |
Horsepower from 1 L | 68 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 143 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 1.8 i |
Precise engine size | 1.8 L (1796 cc) |
Difference from world average | 23.4 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | - |
Horsepower from 1 L | 53 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 138 cc to 100 kg |