Subaru Forester IV 2.0 XT 240HP automatic 4x4 vs Ford Ecosport II 1.0 Ecoboost 125HP manual

Subaru Forester IV 2.0 XT 240HP automatic 4x4

Source: wikipedia.org M 93 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Germany

9 reasons for

Subaru Forester IV, model available from 2013.
It has 2.0 XT 240HP ic petrol engine produced from 2013.
Drive 4x4 has automatic gearbox.

4 reasons for

Ford Ecosport II, model available from 2013.
It has 1.0 Ecoboost 125HP petrol engine produced from 2013.
Drive on the front axle has manual, 5 speed gearbox.

Ford Ecosport II 1.0 Ecoboost 125HP manual
Subaru

9 reasons for Subaru Forester IV 2.0 XT 240KM automat 4x4 in comparison to Ford Ecosport II 1.0 Ecoboost 125HP manual

Reasons for
135

Maximal power

240 > 125 hp
The Subaru Forester IV 2.0 XT 240HP automatic 4x4 has by 92 percent more horsepower in comparison to Ford Ecosport II. The Subaru Forester IV will be distinctly better accelerate thanks to grater amout of horses under its hoot. Also overtaking other vehicles while driving should be a piece of cake for a car equipped with stronger engine.
50

Acceleration 0-100 km/h

7.5 > 12.7 s
If a dynamic driving is what you enjoy, the Subaru is better for you because it’s acceleration to 100 km/h is 41 % faster than the Ford Ecosport II 1.0 Ecoboost 125HP manual.
33

Top speed

221 > 180 km/h
The top velocity of the ​​Subaru is greater compared with the Ford Ecosport II by 23, which allows the Subaru Forester IV 2.0 XT 240HP automatic 4x4 to cover quicker long distance of highway. The difference at the level of 23 % is little and will be negligible in everyday driving.
15

Wheelbase

2,634 > 2,521 mm
Subaru Forester IV 2.0 XT 240HP automatic 4x4 has 113 mm longer wheelbase when compared to the Ford Ecosport II 1.0 Ecoboost 125HP manual. A longer wheelbase gives more stable and comfortable ride, especially when driving fast. It also provides more storage space. But, vehicles with a longer wheelbase are not as maneuverable as those with a shorter wheelbase.
14

Cylinders

4 > 3
8

Engine capacity

1,999 > 1,000 cc
The Subaru has 999 cubic centimeters bigger engine displacement in relation to the Ford Ecosport II. The difference is relatively notable. For this reason the Subaru Forester IV should accelerate faster and be able to achieve higher maximum speed. On the other hand bigger engine capacity means worst fuel consumption.
6

Length

4,596 > 4,244 mm
The Subaru is 8 percent longer in relation to the Ford. The length of the car plays a role in terms of travelling comfort and space in the boot. The Subaru Forester IV preasumbly will be offering to it's users more space for legs. At the same time the Subaru Forester IV will be better driven but the Ford Ecosport II 1.0 Ecoboost 125HP manual will be a bit easier for parking due to shorter length .
4

Cylinder layout

boxer > inline
A Boxer engine put inside the Subaru Forester IV 2.0 XT 240HP automatic 4x4 is noticeably better because it can be shorter and lighter and produces less vibrations in comparison to engine with cylinders arranged in a straight line. Moreover it is worth knowing its flat design results in that a car has a lower center of gravity what affects the better grip. The advantage of In-line engine, like the one installed in the Ford Ecosport II, is that because of its simple construction it can be fuel efficient compared to other types of engines.
0

Transmission

automatic > manual
Automatic transmission which is installed in the Subaru Forester IV 2.0 XT 240HP automatic 4x4 despite having a few disadvantages offers much more better comfort of driving. After a long time spent at the steering wheel you probably would be less exhausted. Also automatic puts less strain on the engine thanks to the factory settings of shifts in specific revs range.

Ford

4 reasons for Ford Ecosport II 1.0 Ecoboost 125KM manual in comparison to Subaru Forester IV 2.0 XT 240HP automatic 4x4

Reasons for
112

Average consumption

5.3 > 8.3 l
The fuel economy is distinctly to Ford's advantage. This automobile uses 3 l fewer fuel in the mixed cycle compared to the Subaru. Interesting is that average fuel consumption in the mixed cycle for the mini 4x4 class, in which the Ford Ecosport II 1.0 Ecoboost 125HP manual is classified, is 7.5 l while the Ford Ecosport II burns up by 29 percent less fuel than the average.
56

Urban consumption

6.8 > 11.2 l
The Ford Ecosport II uses 4.4 l fewer fuel while driving inside city when compared to the Subaru Forester IV. The difference at the level of 39 % is quite significant in everyday usage of the automobile. Moreover, in a long run it will even bring you significant savings. Bear in mind that fuel consumption may change depending on your driving style
24

Extra-urban consumption

4.7 > 7 l
22

Width

2,057 > 1,795 mm
Width of a vehicle affects the amount of space for passengers as well as stability while driving. The Ford Ecosport II is widther by 262 millimeters than the Subaru Forester IV and is not really worth considering. The medium for the „mini 4x4” segment equals to 1,797 mm and is by 260 mm smaller than the same feature of the Ford Ecosport II.

Cars specifications

Subaru Forester IV 2.0 XT 240HP automatic 4x4 Ford Ecosport II 1.0 Ecoboost 125HP manual
    Gross trailer weight 1,996 kg -
    Price range popular popular
    Model release date 2013 2013
    Facelifting no no
    Class compact SUV compact SUV
By using this site, you agree to the storage and use of cookie files. OK