Ford Cougar 1998 vs Chrysler Sebring 2000

 
Ford Cougar
1998 - 2001
Chrysler Sebring
2000 - 2007
Gearbox: ManualAutomatic
Engine: 2.5 Petrol3.0 Petrol

Performance

Power: 170 HP203 HP
Torque: 220 NM278 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 8.6 seconds10 seconds
Ford Cougar engine produces 33 HP less power than Chrysler Sebring, whereas torque is 58 NM less than Chrysler Sebring. Despite less power, Ford Cougar reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds faster.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 9.510.1
Real fuel consumption: 10.9 l/100km10.0 l/100km
The Chrysler Sebring is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise.
By specification Ford Cougar consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler Sebring, which means that by driving the Ford Cougar over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel.
But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Ford Cougar consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler Sebring.
Fuel tank capacity: 60 litres62 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 630 km in combined cycle610 km in combined cycle
820 km on highway730 km on highway
550 km with real consumption620 km with real consumption

Dimensions

Length: 4.70 m4.83 m
Width: 1.77 m1.79 m
Height: 1.32 m1.37 m
Ford Cougar is smaller.
Ford Cougar is 13 cm shorter than the Chrysler Sebring, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Cougar is 5 cm lower.
Trunk capacity: 430 litres460 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
930 litresno data
Chrysler Sebring has more luggage space.
Ford Cougar has 30 litres less trunk space than the Chrysler Sebring.
Turning diameter: 10.9 metersno data
Gross weight (kg): 1`825no data
Safety: no datano data
Quality: no datano data
Average price (€): 16001800
Pros and Cons: Ford Cougar has
  • more dynamic
  • lower price
Chrysler Sebring has
  • more power
  • roomier boot
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv