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 16V |
1.99 L (1991 cc) |
15.1% smaller | 74 cc to 1 mpg | 66 hp from 1 L | 153 cc to 100 kg |
1.9 |
1.84 L (1840 cc) |
21.6% smaller | 66 cc to 1 mpg | 54 hp from 1 L | 142 cc to 100 kg |
1.8 |
1.84 L (1840 cc) |
21.6% smaller | - | 62 hp from 1 L | 142 cc to 100 kg |
2.0 TD |
2 L (1998 cc) |
14.8% smaller | 56 cc to 1 mpg | 45 hp from 1 L | 154 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 16V |
---|---|
Precise engine size | 1.99 L (1991 cc) |
Difference from world average | 15.1 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 74 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 66 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 153 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 1.9 |
Precise engine size | 1.84 L (1840 cc) |
Difference from world average | 21.6 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 66 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 54 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 142 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 1.8 |
Precise engine size | 1.84 L (1840 cc) |
Difference from world average | 21.6 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | - |
Horsepower from 1 L | 62 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 142 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 TD |
Precise engine size | 2 L (1998 cc) |
Difference from world average | 14.8 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 56 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 45 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 154 cc to 100 kg |