Compare two cars

Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion

Car #1
Make
Model
Variant
Engine
Car #2
Make
Model
Variant
Engine

compare selected cars
2002. - 2005.
M - MPV
MPV, 5 door
front
Badges
Production
Vehicle class
Body style
Wheel drive
Safety
2000. - 2005.
M - MPV
MPV, 5 door
front

Marketing

!function(v,t,o){var a=t.createElement("script");a.src="https://ad.vidverto.io/vidverto/js/aries/v1/invocation.js",a.setAttribute("fetchpriority","high");var r=v.top;r.document.head.appendChild(a),v.self!==v.top&&(v.frameElement.style.cssText="width:0px!important;height:0px!important;"),r.aries=r.aries||{},r.aries.v1=r.aries.v1||{commands:[]};var c=r.aries.v1;c.commands.push((function(){var d=document.getElementById("_vidverto-725dc94bb887f000f0b279c49613751c");d.setAttribute("id",(d.getAttribute("id")+(new Date()).getTime()));var t=v.frameElement||d;c.mount("10285",t,{width:720,height:405})}))}(window,document); */ ?>

Dimensons & Outlines

4020 mm
1721 mm
1528 mm
337 liters
1175 liters
45 liters
Length
Width
Height
Boot (min)
Boot (max)
Fuel tank
3826 mm
1673 mm
1553 mm
390 liters
1085 liters
35 liters
2002 Ford Fusion
2000 Audi A2

Engine

Petrol
4 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Nat. Asp.
1388 cc
80 hp
124 Nm
Engine
Fuel
Configuration
Aspiration
Displacement
Power
Torque
Volkswagen
1.4 16v
Petrol
4 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Nat. Asp.
1390 cc
75 hp
128 Nm

Performance (manual gearbox)

manual gearbox - 5 gears
1070 kg
13.7 s
163 km/h
8.5 l/100km
5.3 l/100km
6.5 l/100km
154 g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
manual gearbox - 5 gears
895 kg
12.3 s
173 km/h
8.1 l/100km
4.6 l/100km
5.9 l/100km
142 g/km

Performance (automatic gearbox)

automatic - 5 gears
1070 kg
13.7 s
163 km/h
8.5 l/100km
5.3 l/100km
6.5 l/100km
154 g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
 
kg
s
km/h
l/100km
l/100km
l/100km
g/km

Expenses

1500 EUR
Price from
1800 EUR

Virtual Adviser's™ opinion

Overview

Well, these are two pretty similar cars we have here! It's only details that could potentially make the difference. Considering they both belong to the mpv segment and utilize the same 5-door MPV body style and the front wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific petrol engine choice they offer. The first one has a Ford-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 80hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 75hp engine designed by Volkswagen.

Safety

A starting point here would be to take a look at the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests which were performed on both of the cars, with the same number of safety stars gained in the process. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the mpv segment, which is generally a good thing safety-wise, still it doesn't help us solve our dilemma, does it? Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the American car offers a considerable difference of 20% more metal.

Reliability

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that Ford as a brand displays somewhat better results, at least on all of the models level. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Ford with an average rating of 4.5, and models under the Audi badge with 4.2 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed Fusion as average reliability-wise, and A2 is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the American car rank it on average as 4.4, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.2 out of 5.

Performance & Fuel economy

Audi is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.4 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 173 kilometers per hour, 10km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 6.2 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (46 mpg), in combined cycle.


Verdict

Ford appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In my opinion, everything taken into account, the American car offers significantly better overall protection, taking the lead here. From there things take a different direction, with Audi outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! It's not difficult to say then that if I'd need to make a choice, it would definitely be the Audi. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. In case you have two minutes to spare I invite you to define your needs, desires and budget and see which car would be chosen by the virtual adviser, among more than 12.000 different ones in our database.

Check a car by its VIN number

Follow us

AutoManiac Instagram

AutoManiac Facebook

AutoManiac database currently covers:

47worldwide automotive brands
1.592different vehicle models
2.311engines
14.428specific cars