Chrysler Sebring 2000 vs Ford Cougar 1998
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 10.4 seconds | |
|
Chrysler Sebring is more dynamic to drive. Chrysler Sebring engine produces 33 HP more power than Ford Cougar, whereas torque is 58 NM more than Ford Cougar. Thanks to more power Chrysler Sebring reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.1 | 9.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.0 l/100km | 10.5 l/100km | |
|
By specification 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. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Chrysler Sebring consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Cougar. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 610 km in combined cycle | 620 km in combined cycle | |
| 730 km on highway | 830 km on highway | ||
| 620 km with real consumption | 570 km with real consumption | ||
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
| |