Ford Mondeo 2000 vs Skoda Felicia 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 135 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Ford Mondeo is more dynamic to drive. Ford Mondeo engine produces 50 HP more power than Skoda Felicia, whereas torque is 35 NM more than Skoda Felicia. Thanks to more power Ford Mondeo reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 6.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Felicia is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Mondeo consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Felicia, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Mondeo could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Mondeo consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Felicia. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 42 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 600 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 770 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 550 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford Mondeo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 500'000 km | 460'000 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 | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Ford Focus | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Polo, Skoda Octavia, Seat Ibiza, Seat Cordoba | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Skoda Felicia might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Skoda Felicia 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.73 m | 3.86 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.64 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Ford Mondeo is larger. Ford Mondeo is 87 cm longer than the Skoda Felicia, 17 cm wider, while the height of Ford Mondeo is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 500 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1370 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Mondeo is 0.6 metres more than that of the Skoda Felicia, which means Ford Mondeo can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`875 | 1`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | low | |
| Ford Mondeo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Skoda Felicia has serious deffects in 260 percent more cases than Ford Mondeo, so Ford Mondeo quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Mondeo has
|
Skoda Felicia has
| |