Ford Mondeo 2003 vs Honda CR-V 2002
| Body: | Hatchback | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 162 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.3 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Ford Mondeo engine produces 8 HP more power than Honda CR-V, the torque is the same for both cars. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.7 | 10.1 | |
| Ford Mondeo consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Mondeo could require 90 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 550 km in combined cycle | 570 km in combined cycle | |
| 740 km on highway | 610 km on highway | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Honda CR-V 2002: Car has Honda`s real-time four-wheel drive system, which sends torque to the front wheels under normal conditions. Multi-plate clutch transfers torque to rear axle when wheel slip is detected (pressure is applied to clutch by dual pump system). To allow ABS to work smoothly, the clutch is also disengaged during braking. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 480'000 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 Honda CR-V engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 15 years | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Honda CR-V might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Ford Mondeo 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: | 4.73 m | 4.54 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.71 m | |
|
Ford Mondeo is larger, but lower. Ford Mondeo is 19 cm longer than the Honda CR-V, 3 cm wider, while the height of Ford Mondeo is 28 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 500 litres | 525 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1370 litres | 952 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Ford Mondeo has 25 litres less trunk space than the Honda CR-V. This could mean that the Ford Mondeo uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford Mondeo (by 418 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`950 | 1`910 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Honda CR-V has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Mondeo has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Honda CR-V, so Honda CR-V quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Mondeo has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |