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 i 16V |
1.77 L (1769 cc) |
24.6% smaller | 61 cc to 1 mpg | 66 hp from 1 L | 136 cc to 100 kg |
2.0 i 16V |
2 L (1998 cc) |
14.8% smaller | 74 cc to 1 mpg | 70 hp from 1 L | 143 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 1.8 i 16V |
---|---|
Precise engine size | 1.77 L (1769 cc) |
Difference from world average | 24.6 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 61 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 66 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 136 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V |
Precise engine size | 2 L (1998 cc) |
Difference from world average | 14.8 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 74 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 70 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 143 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 i 16V |
1.77 L (1769 cc) |
24.6% smaller | 61 cc to 1 mpg | 66 hp from 1 L | 136 cc to 100 kg |
2.0 i 16V |
2 L (1998 cc) |
14.8% smaller | 74 cc to 1 mpg | 70 hp from 1 L | 143 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 1.8 i 16V |
---|---|
Precise engine size | 1.77 L (1769 cc) |
Difference from world average | 24.6 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 61 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 66 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 136 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V |
Precise engine size | 2 L (1998 cc) |
Difference from world average | 14.8 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 74 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 70 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 143 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 i 16V |
1.77 L (1769 cc) |
24.6% smaller | 61 cc to 1 mpg | 66 hp from 1 L | 136 cc to 100 kg |
2.0 i 16V |
2 L (1998 cc) |
14.8% smaller | 74 cc to 1 mpg | 70 hp from 1 L | 143 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 1.8 i 16V |
---|---|
Precise engine size | 1.77 L (1769 cc) |
Difference from world average | 24.6 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 61 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 66 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 136 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V |
Precise engine size | 2 L (1998 cc) |
Difference from world average | 14.8 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 74 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 70 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 143 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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 16V |
2 L (1998 cc) |
14.8% smaller | - | 65 hp from 1 L | 167 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 16V |
---|---|
Precise engine size | 2 L (1998 cc) |
Difference from world average | 14.8 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | - |
Horsepower from 1 L | 65 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 167 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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 16V |
2 L (1998 cc) |
14.8% smaller | 71 cc to 1 mpg | 58 hp from 1 L | 167 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 16V |
---|---|
Precise engine size | 2 L (1998 cc) |
Difference from world average | 14.8 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 71 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 | 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 |
2 L (1998 cc) |
14.8% smaller | 71 cc to 1 mpg | 58 hp from 1 L | 167 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 16V |
---|---|
Precise engine size | 2 L (1998 cc) |
Difference from world average | 14.8 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 71 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 | 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 i |
2 L (1998 cc) |
14.8% smaller | 77 cc to 1 mpg | 58 hp from 1 L | 167 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 | 77 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 |