Ford Mondeo 2005 vs Volvo V50 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.5 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: | 170 HP | 220 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.7 seconds | 6.9 seconds | |
|
Volvo V50 is a more dynamic driving. Ford Mondeo engine produces 50 HP less power than Volvo V50, whereas torque is 100 NM less than Volvo V50. Due to the lower power, Ford Mondeo reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.0 | 8.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.3 l/100km | 9.4 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V50 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Mondeo consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V50, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Mondeo could require 180 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Mondeo consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V50. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 590 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km on highway | 930 km on highway | ||
| 570 km with real consumption | 650 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V50 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 390'000 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 | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volvo S40, Volvo C30, Volvo C70 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.80 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Ford Mondeo is larger, but slightly lower. Ford Mondeo is 29 cm longer than the Volvo V50, 4 cm wider, while the height of Ford Mondeo is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | 417 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1700 litres | 1307 litres | |
|
Ford Mondeo has more luggage capacity. Ford Mondeo has 123 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V50. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford Mondeo (by 393 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Mondeo is 0.5 metres more than that of the Volvo V50, which means Ford Mondeo can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`105 | 1`850 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Ford Mondeo has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Volvo V50, so Ford Mondeo quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 2200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.3/10 | 6.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Mondeo has
|
Volvo V50 has
| |