Ford Kuga vs MG EHS: real-world fuel use
In real life the Ford Kuga uses 2.5 L/100 km less fuel than the MG EHS — about £523 a year at 15,000 km and £1.40/L.
91,395 cars in the data
Ford Kuga4.3×the official figure
Official
1.1
Real world
4.7
0510 L/100 km
7,270 cars in the data
MG EHS3.9×the official figure
Official
1.8
Real world
7.2
0510 L/100 km
| Ford Kuga | MG EHS | |
|---|---|---|
| Real fuel use (L/100 km) | 4.7 | 7.2 |
| Official fuel use (L/100 km) | 1.1 | 1.8 |
| Gap vs official | 4.3× | 3.9× |
| Distance with engine off | 42% | 15% |
| Real CO2 from fuel (g/km) | 109 | 166 |
| Official electric range (km) | 66 | 52 |
| Average kerb weight (kg) | 1,844 | 1,846 |
| Cars in the data | 91,395 | 7,270 |
Bold = better. Source: EEA OBFCM real-world data, reporting year 2024, CC BY 4.0.
Which one is cheaper to run?
On fuel alone, the Ford Kuga comes out ahead for the average owner. Your own result depends mostly on how often you charge. Owners drive the Ford Kuga 42% of the time with the engine off, and the MG EHS 15%. Run the calculator with your own driving.