Ford Mondeo 2005 vs Honda Accord 2003
| Body: | Hatchback | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 155 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
|
Honda Accord is a more dynamic driving. Ford Mondeo engine produces 30 HP less power than Honda Accord, whereas torque is 20 NM less than Honda Accord. Due to the lower power, Ford Mondeo reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 7.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 8.5 l/100km | |
|
By specification Ford Mondeo consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda Accord, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Mondeo could require 15 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Ford Mondeo consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda Accord. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 1040 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 760 km with real consumption | ||
| Honda Accord gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 500'000 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 Mondeo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Ford Focus | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda CR-V, Honda FR-V, Honda Stream | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Honda Accord might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Honda Accord 2003 2.0 engine: In 2001, Honda introduced the K-series engine lineup, featuring an aluminum block with an open-deck design and cast-iron cylinder liners. It utilizes a port fuel injection system, a 16-valve aluminum cylinder head without hydraulic lifters, individual ignition coils, a VTC cam ... More about Honda Accord 2003 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.73 m | 4.66 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Ford Mondeo is larger, but slightly lower. Ford Mondeo is 7 cm longer than the Honda Accord, 5 cm wider, while the height of Ford Mondeo is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 500 litres | 459 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1370 litres | no data | |
|
Ford Mondeo has more luggage capacity. Ford Mondeo has 41 litres more trunk space than the Honda Accord. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Mondeo is 0.1 metres more than that of the Honda Accord. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`875 | 1`920 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Honda Accord has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Ford Mondeo, so Honda Accord quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 1800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.3/10 | 8.0/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Mondeo has
|
Honda Accord has
| |