Ford Mondeo 2003 vs Mazda 6 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 166 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 NM | 207 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.7 seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
|
Ford Mondeo is more dynamic to drive. Ford Mondeo engine produces 4 HP more power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 13 NM more than Mazda 6. Thanks to more power Ford Mondeo reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.0 | 9.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.1 l/100km | 9.2 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 6 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 Mazda 6, 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 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 590 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 580 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 6 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 | 6 years | |
| 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. | |||
| Ford Mondeo 2003 2.5 engine: The LCBD engine features a multi-point fuel injection system, where each cylinder is equipped with its own injector for precise fuel delivery. This system is highly durable and reliable, with a low likelihood of ... More about Ford Mondeo 2003 2.5 engine Mazda 6 2002 2.3 engine: The most common problems with this engine are with the cooling system pump and thermostat, as well as with the engine cushions (which can cause vibrations), the lambda sensor and the intake manifold adjuster. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.80 m | 4.69 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Ford Mondeo is larger, but slightly lower. Ford Mondeo is 11 cm longer than the Mazda 6, 3 cm wider, while the height of Ford Mondeo is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1700 litres | 1712 litres | |
| Ford Mondeo has 35 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 6. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 6 (by 12 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Mondeo is 0.3 metres more than that of the Mazda 6. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`105 | 1`935 | |
| Safety: | 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 Mazda 6, so Ford Mondeo quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.5/10 | 6.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Mondeo has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |