2016 • Ford
Kuga
Ford Kuga 1.5 EcoBoost (182 Hp) 2016Overall Score67.5/100
2016 Ford Kuga vs 2016 Skoda Kodiaq Comparison
Compare technical specifications, scores and everyday-use differences side by side.
2016 • Skoda
Kodiaq
Skoda Kodiaq 1.4 TSI (150 Hp) 2016Overall Score68.25/100
WINNER
Skoda Kodiaq
Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points.
67.5–68.25
SPECIFICATION GROUPS
Every difference between the two cars
Basic Specifications
Ford KugaSpecificationSkoda Kodiaq
FordMakeSkoda
KugaModelKodiaq
2016Model year2016
SUVBody typeSUV
5Seats5/7
5Doors5
Performance
Ford KugaSpecificationSkoda Kodiaq
10,1 s0–100 km/h9,8 s
200 km/hTop speed197 km/h
1498 ccEngine displacement1395 cc
182 HPPower150 HP
240 NmTorque250 Nm
4Cylinders4
Fuel & Consumption
Ford KugaSpecificationSkoda Kodiaq
PetrolFuel typePetrol
60 ltFuel tank60 lt
9,4 ltUrban consumption8,2 lt
6,3 ltExtra-urban consumption5,9 lt
7,5 ltAverage consumption6,8 lt
Transmission & Chassis
Dimensions
Ford KugaSpecificationSkoda Kodiaq
4531 mmLength4697 mm
1838 mmWidth1882 mm
1703 mmHeight1655 mm
1686 KgWeight1540/1578 Kg
2690 mmWheelbase2791 mm
E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note
2016 Ford Kuga and 2016 Skoda Kodiaq approach the same decision from different angles. We compare the exact versions so changes in engine, transmission, dimensions and equipment are not hidden behind the model names.
Overall, Skoda Kodiaq leads the E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points. The score provides a consistent summary, while the best choice can still change with priorities such as urban efficiency, luggage space, performance or equipment.
SIMILAR COMPARISONS
Similar comparisons
Explore related comparisons featuring cars from this matchup.
VS
VS
VS
VSComments are loading…