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 T8 |
1.97 L (1969 cc) |
16.1% smaller | 16 cc to 1 mpg | 162 hp from 1 L | - |
2.0 T6 |
1.97 L (1969 cc) |
16.1% smaller | 64 cc to 1 mpg | 157 hp from 1 L | 104 cc to 100 kg |
2.0 D5 |
1.97 L (1969 cc) |
16.1% smaller | 45 cc to 1 mpg | 119 hp from 1 L | 98 cc to 100 kg |
2.0 D4 |
1.97 L (1969 cc) |
16.1% smaller | 39 cc to 1 mpg | 96 hp from 1 L | 104 cc to 100 kg |
2.0 D3 |
1.97 L (1969 cc) |
16.1% smaller | 39 cc to 1 mpg | 76 hp from 1 L | 109 cc to 100 kg |
2.0 T5 |
1.97 L (1969 cc) |
16.1% smaller | 55 cc to 1 mpg | 127 hp from 1 L | 109 cc to 100 kg |
2.0 T8 Twin Engine |
1.97 L (1969 cc) |
16.1% smaller | 18 cc to 1 mpg | 154 hp from 1 L | 94 cc to 100 kg |
2.0 T4 |
1.97 L (1969 cc) |
16.1% smaller | 56 cc to 1 mpg | 96 hp from 1 L | 109 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 T8 |
---|---|
Precise engine size | 1.97 L (1969 cc) |
Difference from world average | 16.1 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 16 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 162 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | - |
Vehicle | 2.0 T6 |
Precise engine size | 1.97 L (1969 cc) |
Difference from world average | 16.1 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 64 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 157 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 104 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 D5 |
Precise engine size | 1.97 L (1969 cc) |
Difference from world average | 16.1 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 45 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 119 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 98 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 D4 |
Precise engine size | 1.97 L (1969 cc) |
Difference from world average | 16.1 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 39 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 96 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 104 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 D3 |
Precise engine size | 1.97 L (1969 cc) |
Difference from world average | 16.1 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 39 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 76 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 109 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 T5 |
Precise engine size | 1.97 L (1969 cc) |
Difference from world average | 16.1 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 55 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 127 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 109 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 T8 Twin Engine |
Precise engine size | 1.97 L (1969 cc) |
Difference from world average | 16.1 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 18 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 154 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 94 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 T4 |
Precise engine size | 1.97 L (1969 cc) |
Difference from world average | 16.1 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 56 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 96 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 109 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 T5 |
1.97 L (1969 cc) |
16.1% smaller | 60 cc to 1 mpg | 129 hp from 1 L | - |
2.0 T4 |
1.97 L (1969 cc) |
16.1% smaller | 58 cc to 1 mpg | 96 hp from 1 L | - |
Vehicle | 2.0 T5 |
---|---|
Precise engine size | 1.97 L (1969 cc) |
Difference from world average | 16.1 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 60 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 129 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | - |
Vehicle | 2.0 T4 |
Precise engine size | 1.97 L (1969 cc) |
Difference from world average | 16.1 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | 58 cc to 1 mpg |
Horsepower from 1 L | 96 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | - |