Opel Omega 2000 vs SAAB 9-5 2001
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 3.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 120 HP | 177 HP | |
| Torque: | 280 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
SAAB 9-5 is a more dynamic driving. Opel Omega engine produces 57 HP less power than SAAB 9-5, whereas torque is 70 NM less than SAAB 9-5. Due to the lower power, Opel Omega reaches 100 km/h speed 3.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.3 | 7.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
|
The Opel Omega is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Opel Omega consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the SAAB 9-5, which means that by driving the Opel Omega over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Opel Omega consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the SAAB 9-5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1020 km in combined cycle | 970 km in combined cycle | |
| 1290 km on highway | 1200 km on highway | ||
| 1050 km with real consumption | 1000 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (SAAB 9-5) 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 (Opel Omega) 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: | 440'000 km | 350'000 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 Opel Omega engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Opel Frontera, Opel Sintra | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Opel Omega might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Opel Omega 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: | 4.90 m | 4.83 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.50 m | 1.50 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Opel Omega is 7 cm longer than the SAAB 9-5, 1 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1800 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Opel Omega is 0.2 metres more than that of the SAAB 9-5. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`265 | 1`800 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| SAAB 9-5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Opel Omega has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than SAAB 9-5, so SAAB 9-5 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Opel Omega has
|
SAAB 9-5 has
| |