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: | Automatic | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 130 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 330 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 9.4 seconds | |
|
Honda Accord is a more dynamic driving. Ford Mondeo engine produces 10 HP less power than Honda Accord, whereas torque is 10 NM less than Honda Accord. Due to the lower power, Ford Mondeo reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.5 | 5.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.7 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Honda Accord is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Mondeo consumes 2.1 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 315 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Mondeo consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda Accord. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 56 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 1200 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 1410 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 980 km with real consumption | ||
| Honda Accord gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda CR-V, Honda FR-V | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Ford Mondeo 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. | |||
| Honda Accord 2003 2.2 engine: Honda’s first diesel engine featured an aluminum block, a variable-geometry turbocharger, second-generation Bosch Common Rail injection, 16-valve cylinder head, and a balance shaft integrated into the crankcase. The ... More about Honda Accord 2003 2.2 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 | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Mondeo is 0.5 metres less than that of the Honda Accord, which means Ford Mondeo can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | no data | |
| 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
| |