Real fuel consumption and economy logo

Ford Kuga 2008 fuel consumption

Ford Kuga from 2008 to 2013 real fuel consumption according to user reports is approximately 30% higher compared to advertised fuel consumption. For petrol engines real consumption is in average 27% higher, but for diesel engines is approximately 34% higher. Since 2008 the Ford Kuga average difference between owner-reported real-world fuel consumption and declared fuel economy has been similar to average.

Year-to-year deviations of actual owner-reported average fuel consumption from advertised values

YearGasoline carsDiesel cars
All carmakersFord KugaAll carmakersFord Kuga
2008+12%+12% +13%+40%
Show all years
2009+13%+12% +14%+40%
2010+16%+12% +16%+40%
2011+19%+12% +19%+40%
2012+21%+12% +23%+40%
2013+23%+12% +27%+40%

See below for the actual consumption of generations and versions of Ford Kuga.

2008 - 2013

Ford Kuga 2008 fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines23.3 MPG
10.1 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines20.8 MPG
11.3 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+12%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines40.2 MPG
5.9 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines31.8 MPG
7.4 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+40%
ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
2.0 liter diesel engine
Ford Kuga 2008 2.0 TDCi 136 HP manual 44.4 MPG
5.3 l/100km
31.8 MPG
7.4 l/100km+40%
Ford Kuga 2008 2.0 TDCi 4x4 136 HP manual 36.8 MPG
6.4 l/100km
2.5 liter petrol engine
Ford Kuga 2008 2.5 Turbo AWD Automatic 4x4 200 HP automatic 22.8 MPG
10.3 l/100km
20.5 MPG
11.5 l/100km+12%
Ford Kuga 2009 2.5 Turbo AWD 200 HP manual 23.8 MPG
9.9 l/100km
21.2 MPG
11.1 l/100km+12%

* - Difference between advertised and user reported fuel economy has been calculated taking into account only those car versions for which information is available both on the fuel consumption specified by the manufacturer and reported by users.

User-reported fuel consumption may not accurately represent all users' experiences due to variables such as driving conditions, driving style, technical condition of the vehicle, and other circumstances. Thus, it should not be relied upon as a representative indicator.