Chrysler 300C 2005 vs Ford Mondeo 2003
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 130 HP | |
| Torque: | 510 NM | 330 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.9 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Chrysler 300C is more dynamic to drive. Chrysler 300C engine produces 88 HP more power than Ford Mondeo, whereas torque is 180 NM more than Ford Mondeo. Thanks to more power Chrysler 300C reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.3 | 6.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.1 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Mondeo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chrysler 300C consumes 2.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Mondeo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chrysler 300C could require 345 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chrysler 300C consumes 2.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Mondeo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 68 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 930 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 1160 km on highway | ||
| 740 km with real consumption | 860 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford Mondeo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Ford Mondeo) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Chrysler 300C) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 350'000 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 Chrysler 300C engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Jeep Grand Cherokee, Jeep Commander | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Chrysler 300C might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Chrysler 300C 2005 3.0 engine: The main issues with this diesel engine stem from the fuel system and its sensitive piezo injectors. These injectors are known for being highly demanding in terms of fuel quality, which can lead to performance ... More about Chrysler 300C 2005 3.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.02 m | 4.80 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.56 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Chrysler 300C is larger. Chrysler 300C is 22 cm longer than the Ford Mondeo, 7 cm wider, while the height of Chrysler 300C is 12 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 630 litres | 540 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1602 litres | 1700 litres | |
| Chrysler 300C has 90 litres more trunk space than the Ford Mondeo. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford Mondeo (by 98 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 11.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chrysler 300C is 0.9 metres more than that of the Ford Mondeo, which means Chrysler 300C can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`360 kg | 2`165 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`875 kg | 1`495 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 485 kg | 670 kg | |
| Chrysler 300C load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 38 procentiem less than Ford Mondeo. Therefore, Ford Mondeo is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 4400 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.0/10 | 7.5/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler 300C has
|
Ford Mondeo has
| |