Ford Sierra 1990 vs Seat Toledo 1991
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 68 HP | |
| Torque: | 152 NM | 127 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 16.4 seconds | 16.5 seconds | |
|
Ford Sierra is more dynamic to drive. Ford Sierra engine produces 7 HP more power than Seat Toledo, whereas torque is 25 NM more than Seat Toledo. Thanks to more power Ford Sierra reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 5.7 | |
|
The Seat Toledo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Ford Sierra consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Seat Toledo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Sierra could require 105 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 930 km in combined cycle | 960 km in combined cycle | |
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Seat Toledo) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Ford Sierra) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 700'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Seat Toledo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 3 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Audi 80, Volkswagen Polo, Skoda Felicia | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Seat Toledo might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Seat Toledo engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.42 m | 4.32 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Ford Sierra is larger, but slightly lower. Ford Sierra is 10 cm longer than the Seat Toledo, 3 cm wider, while the height of Ford Sierra is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Sierra is 0.5 metres less than that of the Seat Toledo, which means Ford Sierra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`150 | 1`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Ford Sierra has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Seat Toledo has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Ford Sierra, so Ford Sierra quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 400 | 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Sierra has
|
Seat Toledo has
| |