Chrysler Sebring 2000 vs Ford Cougar 1998
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 2.4 - 3.0 | 2.0 - 2.5 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 147 - 203 HP | 130 - 205 HP | |
| Torque: | 214 - 278 NM | 176 - 234 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 7.8 - 10.4 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 - 10.1 | 8.3 - 10.2 | |
|
Chrysler Sebring petrol engines consumes on average 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than Ford Cougar. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.83 m | 4.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.32 m | |
|
Chrysler Sebring is larger. Chrysler Sebring is 13 cm longer than the Ford Cougar, 2 cm wider, while the height of Chrysler Sebring is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 460 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 930 litres | |
|
Chrysler Sebring has more luggage capacity. Chrysler Sebring has 30 litres more trunk space than the Ford Cougar. | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.9 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | ~ 1`799 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 1600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler Sebring has
|
Ford Cougar has
| |