Ford Mondeo 2000 vs Rover 75 2001
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.8 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 | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 160 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.2 seconds | 12.2 seconds | |
|
Ford Mondeo is more dynamic to drive. Ford Mondeo engine produces 5 HP more power than Rover 75, whereas torque is 10 NM more than Rover 75. Thanks to more power Ford Mondeo reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.9 | 7.8 | |
| Ford Mondeo consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Rover 75, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Mondeo could require 15 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 1060 km on highway | ||
| Rover 75 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 500'000 km | 420'000 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 | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Ford Focus | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Rover 25, Rover 45 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Rover 75 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Rover 75 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 2000 1.8 engine: The Ford CHBA/CHBB, also known as the 1.8 Duratec HE, is a naturally aspirated four-cylinder gasoline engine introduced in 2000 and developed with Mazda’s involvement. It uses an aluminum cylinder block and aluminum 16-valve cylinder head with two camshafts, multipoint fuel injection, and a timing chain drive. With ... More about Ford Mondeo 2000 1.8 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.80 m | 4.79 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.42 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Ford Mondeo is 1 cm longer than the Rover 75, 3 cm wider, while the height of Ford Mondeo is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | 400 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1700 litres | 1222 litres | |
|
Ford Mondeo has more luggage capacity. Ford Mondeo has 140 litres more trunk space than the Rover 75. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford Mondeo (by 478 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Mondeo is 0.3 metres less than that of the Rover 75. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`030 kg | 1`980 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`431 kg | 1`450 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 599 kg | 530 kg | |
| Ford Mondeo load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 12 procentiem more than Rover 75. Therefore, Ford Mondeo is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Mondeo has
|
Rover 75 has
| |