Opel Omega 1994 vs Subaru Forester 2016
| Body: | Sedan | 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: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 185 NM | 198 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
|
Subaru Forester is a more dynamic driving. Opel Omega engine produces 14 HP less power than Subaru Forester, whereas torque is 13 NM less than Subaru Forester. Due to the lower power, Opel Omega reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.5 | 8.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.4 l/100km | 9.0 l/100km | |
|
The Subaru Forester is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Opel Omega consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Subaru Forester, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Opel Omega could require 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Opel Omega consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Subaru Forester. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 880 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 1110 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| 790 km with real consumption | 660 km with real consumption | ||
| Opel Omega gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 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: | 6 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Opel Astra, Opel Vectra, Opel Calibra | Used also on Subaru XV | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| 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: | 4.79 m | 4.61 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.74 m | |
| Opel Omega is 18 cm longer than the Subaru Forester, width is practically the same , while the height of Opel Omega is 28 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 530 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
830 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Opel Omega is 0.4 metres more than that of the Subaru Forester, which means Opel Omega can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`010 | 2`015 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 16 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Opel Omega has
|
Subaru Forester has
| |