Toyota Celica 1999 vs Ford Cougar 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 143 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 172 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.7 seconds | 8.6 seconds | |
| Toyota Celica engine produces 27 HP less power than Ford Cougar, whereas torque is 48 NM less than Ford Cougar. Due to the lower power, Toyota Celica reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 9.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 10.9 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Celica is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Toyota Celica consumes 1.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Cougar, which means that by driving the Toyota Celica over 15,000 km in a year you can save 270 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Toyota Celica consumes 3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Cougar. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 630 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 820 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 550 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota Celica gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Ford Cougar engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Corolla, Toyota RAV4, Toyota Corolla Verso | Used also on Ford Mondeo | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota Celica might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Ford Cougar engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| Toyota Celica 1999 1.8 engine: The 1ZZ-FE engine is more advanced, lighter, and simpler than its predecessor, emphasizing fuel efficiency and output. However, these improvements have come at the cost of reduced durability compared to earlier cast-iron engines. The engine block features an open-deck cooling design for easier production and lower ... More about Toyota Celica 1999 1.8 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.34 m | 4.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.32 m | 1.32 m | |
|
Toyota Celica is smaller. Toyota Celica is 36 cm shorter than the Ford Cougar, 3 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 930 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota Celica is 0.5 metres less than that of the Ford Cougar, which means Toyota Celica can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`200 | 1`825 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2200 | 1600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Celica has
|
Ford Cougar has
| |