Ford Mondeo 2010 vs Renault Laguna 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 175 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 360 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Renault Laguna is a more dynamic driving. Ford Mondeo engine produces 35 HP less power than Renault Laguna, whereas torque is 40 NM less than Renault Laguna. Due to the lower power, Ford Mondeo reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 | 5.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.8 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Mondeo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Mondeo consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Laguna, which means that by driving the Ford Mondeo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Mondeo consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Laguna. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 68 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1250 km in combined cycle | 1190 km in combined cycle | |
| 1480 km on highway | 1410 km on highway | ||
| 1020 km with real consumption | 950 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Ford Focus, Ford Galaxy, Ford C-Max, Ford S-Max | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Nissan Qashqai, Renault Scenic, Opel Vivaro | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Laguna might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Ford Mondeo 2010 2.0 engine: In early production engines, the camshaft timing chain often stretched, requiring timely replacement to avoid potential issues. The fuel system, equipped with piezo injectors, is highly sensitive to fuel ... More about Ford Mondeo 2010 2.0 engine Renault Laguna 2013 2.0 engine: The engine has a good power to fuel consumption ratio and, with careful maintenance, a long service life. The most common problems with these engines are with the fuel injection system and lubrication. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.83 m | 4.80 m | |
| Width: | 1.89 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.51 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Ford Mondeo is larger. Ford Mondeo is 3 cm longer than the Renault Laguna, 8 cm wider, while the height of Ford Mondeo is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 489 litres | 508 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1680 litres | 1593 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, This could mean that the Ford Mondeo uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford Mondeo (by 87 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Mondeo is 0.3 metres more than that of the Renault Laguna. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`290 kg | 2`107 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`592 kg | 1`595 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 698 kg | 512 kg | |
| Ford Mondeo load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 27 procentiem more than Renault Laguna. Therefore, Ford Mondeo is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Renault Laguna has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Mondeo has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Renault Laguna, so Renault Laguna quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3600 | 4400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Mondeo has
|
Renault Laguna has
| |