Ford Sierra 1990 vs Opel Omega 1989
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Ford Sierra is available with rear wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive, while Opel Omega can be equipped only with rear wheel drive. | |||
| Engines: | 1.6 - 2.0 | 2.0 - 3.6 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 71 - 220 HP | 73 - 377 HP | |
| Torque: | 119 - 290 NM | 138 - 568 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.9 - 16.4 seconds | 5.4 - 19 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 - 10.6 | 6.9 - 11.0 | |
|
Ford Sierra petrol engines consumes on average 1.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than Opel Omega. On average, Ford Sierra equipped with diesel engines consume 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Omega. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.47 m | 4.74 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Ford Sierra is smaller. Ford Sierra is 27 cm shorter than the Opel Omega, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Sierra is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 520 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 870 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Sierra is 0.9 metres less than that of the Opel Omega, which means Ford Sierra can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`193 | ~ 1`942 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 3000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Sierra has
|
Opel Omega has
| |