Chrysler Sebring 2001 vs Opel Omega 2000
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.7 Petrol | 2.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 203 HP | 180 HP | |
| Torque: | 262 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.3 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Chrysler Sebring is more dynamic to drive. Chrysler Sebring engine produces 23 HP more power than Opel Omega, whereas torque is 22 NM more than Opel Omega. Thanks to more power Chrysler Sebring reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.6 | 11.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.3 l/100km | 11.0 l/100km | |
|
The Chrysler Sebring is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chrysler Sebring consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Omega, which means that by driving the Chrysler Sebring over 15,000 km in a year you can save 135 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chrysler Sebring consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Omega. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 560 km in combined cycle | 650 km in combined cycle | |
| 730 km on highway | 870 km on highway | ||
| 580 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
| Opel Omega gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Chrysler Sebring) 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.84 m | 4.90 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.46 m | |
| Chrysler Sebring is 6 cm shorter than the Opel Omega, 1 cm wider, while the height of Chrysler Sebring is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 455 litres | 530 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 830 litres | |
|
Opel Omega has more luggage space. Chrysler Sebring has 75 litres less trunk space than the Opel Omega. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chrysler Sebring is 0.2 metres more than that of the Opel Omega. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`990 | 2`200 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler Sebring has
|
Opel Omega has
| |