At a glance
Here is how the two models stack up on the specs that matter most.
| Specification | Turbo Vado 4.0 | Ultimate C380 |
|---|---|---|
| Range | 145 km | 100 km |
| Battery | 0.5 kWh | 0.6 kWh |
| Efficiency | 0.4 kWh/100km | 0.6 kWh/100km |
| 0-100 km/h | 0 s | 0 s |
| Fast charge 10-80% | ~0 min | ~0 min |
| Seats | 1 | 1 |
| Price | $4,000 | $4,500 |
| Rating | 4.6/5 | 4.5/5 |
| Estimated running cost / year | $9 | $14 |
The Turbo Vado 4.0 wins 4 of 8 categories, making it our pick in this head-to-head.
Range & efficiency
The Turbo Vado 4.0 is rated for 145 km of range versus 100 km for the Ultimate C380. That is a difference of about 45 km, which matters most if you do regular long trips.
The Turbo Vado 4.0 consumes about 0.4 kWh per 100 km versus 0.6 kWh for the Ultimate C380 - so the Turbo Vado 4.0 is the cheaper and greener option per kilometre.
Performance
Acceleration figures vary by trim; check the full spec sheet below for the exact variant tested.
Charging
Charging time depends on the charger and battery temperature; the lower 10-80% figure means shorter stops on long trips.
Space & comfort
The Turbo Vado 4.0 seats 1 and the Ultimate C380 seats 1. Check the full spec sheet for cargo volume.
Price & running costs
The Turbo Vado 4.0 lists at $4,000 and the Ultimate C380 at $4,500. At 15,000 km per year, estimated running costs are about $9/yr versus $14/yr.
Verdict
The Turbo Vado 4.0 is our pick, taking 4 of 8 categories in this head-to-head. It leads on the longer range (145 km vs 100 km), the lower consumption (0.4 kWh/100km vs 0.6 kWh/100km) and the better price ($4,000 vs $4,500). That said, the Ultimate C380 is still the better buy if local incentives, dealer offers or brand preference swing it for you.