Chrysler Sebring 2000 vs Ford Cougar 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 203 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 278 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 8.6 seconds | |
| Chrysler Sebring engine produces 33 HP more power than Ford Cougar, whereas torque is 58 NM more than Ford Cougar. Despite the higher power, Chrysler Sebring reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.0 | 9.5 | |
| Chrysler Sebring consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Cougar, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chrysler Sebring could require 75 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 630 km in combined cycle | |
| 760 km on highway | 820 km on highway | ||
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`825 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 1600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler Sebring has
|
Ford Cougar has
| |