Kia Sportage QL vs Ford Kuga II: specs side by side
Quick comparison from catalog data - no editorial review of this pair yet.
Kia · 2015–2021
Sportage QL
- Power
- 85 kW116 PS
- 0–100 km/h
- 11.5 s
- Top speed
- 176 km/h
- Kerb mass
- 1,425 kg
Version spec sheet All generations
Photo: Areaseven / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0
Ford · 2012–2019
Kuga II
No versions in our catalog yet
- Power
- 103–178 kW140–242 PS
- 0–100 km/h
- -
- Top speed
- -
- Kerb mass
- -
Photo: Norbert Aepli, Switzerland (User:Noebu) / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 3.0
In plain words
Ford Kuga II is the older design (from 2012); Kia Sportage QL arrived in 2015. Our catalog has no 0–100 km/h for the Ford Kuga II yet, so some checks above leave it out.
Full specifications
| Kia Sportage QL | Ford Kuga II | |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Version | 1.7 · diesel · 85 kW (116 PS) | No data |
| Production years | 2015–2021 | 2012–2019 |
| Body | SUV | SUV |
| Class | SUV / crossover | SUV / crossover |
| Country | South Korea | United States |
| Performance | ||
| Power Why it matters: More power means stronger acceleration and easier overtaking, especially with a full load. | 85 kW (116 PS) 114 hp | 103–178 kW (140–242 PS) 138–239 hp Better |
| Power, all versions | 85–179 kW (116–243 PS) 114–240 hp | 103–178 kW (140–242 PS) 138–239 hp |
| 0–100 km/h Why it matters: A shorter 0–100 km/h time means quicker getaways and safer merging onto fast roads. | 11.5 s | No data |
| Top speed Why it matters: Top speed hints at how relaxed the car is at motorway speeds, even if you never reach it. | 176 km/h 109 mph | No data |
| Power per tonne | 60 kW/t 73 hp/ton calculated | No data |
| Engine and transmission | ||
| Fuel | Diesel | No data |
| Engine | 1,700 cc 1.7 l | No data |
| Gearbox | 6-speed manual | No data |
| Drive | Front-wheel drive | No data |
| Dimensions and weight | ||
| Length | 4,480 mm 176.4 in † | No data |
| Width | 1,855 mm 73.0 in † | No data |
| Height | 1,635 mm 64.4 in † | No data |
| Wheelbase | 2,670 mm 105.1 in † | No data |
| Kerb weight Why it matters: A lighter car is usually more agile and uses less energy. | 1,425 kg 3,142 lb | No data |
| Boot Why it matters: A bigger boot fits more luggage, shopping or a pram. | 503 l 17.8 cu ft | No data |
| Fuel tank Why it matters: A larger tank means more distance between fuel stops. | 62 l 16.4 gal US | No data |
| Economy and running costs | ||
| Fuel consumption Why it matters: Lower consumption cuts running costs and CO₂ emissions on every trip. | 4.7 l/100 km 50.0 mpg US | No data |
| CO₂ | 124 g/km | No data |
| Fuel cost per year | €1,160/year estimated | No data |
| Range on a full tank | 1,319 km 820 mi estimated | No data |
| Safety | ||
| Euro NCAP | ★★★★★ (2015) | ★★★★★ (2012) |
These cars do not differ in the data we have.
Equal rows hidden (2): Body, Class.
Better marks the stronger figure - only for measurable specs (power, torque, 0–100 km/h, consumption, boot, weight).
Estimated at 15,000 km a year with fuel at €1.65/l diesel. † from another version of this generation.