Vehicle | Precise engine size | Difference from world average | Engine size to consumption ratio | Horsepower from 1 L | Engine size to 100 kg of weight |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 |
2 L (1999 cc) |
14.8% smaller | 64 cc to 1 mpg | 74 hp from 1 L | 133 cc to 100 kg |
1.8 Turbo |
1.8 L (1796 cc) |
23.4% smaller | 62 cc to 1 mpg | 103 hp from 1 L | 112 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 |
---|---|
Precise engine size | 2 L (1999 cc) |
Difference from world average | 14.8 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 64 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 74 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 133 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 1.8 Turbo |
Precise engine size | 1.8 L (1796 cc) |
Difference from world average | 23.4 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 62 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 103 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 112 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | Precise engine size | Difference from world average | Engine size to consumption ratio | Horsepower from 1 L | Engine size to 100 kg of weight |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.8 Turbo |
1.8 L (1796 cc) |
23.4% smaller | - | 100 hp from 1 L | 112 cc to 100 kg |
2.0 |
2 L (1999 cc) |
14.8% smaller | - | 74 hp from 1 L | 133 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 1.8 Turbo |
---|---|
Precise engine size | 1.8 L (1796 cc) |
Difference from world average | 23.4 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | - |
Horsepower from 1 L | 100 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 112 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 |
Precise engine size | 2 L (1999 cc) |
Difference from world average | 14.8 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | - |
Horsepower from 1 L | 74 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 133 cc to 100 kg |