Ford Mondeo 1998 vs Mitsubishi Galant 1997
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 95 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 142 NM | 178 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.9 seconds | 10 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Galant is a more dynamic driving. Ford Mondeo engine produces 41 HP less power than Mitsubishi Galant, whereas torque is 36 NM less than Mitsubishi Galant. Due to the lower power, Ford Mondeo reaches 100 km/h speed 3.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.2 | 9.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.7 l/100km | 9.3 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Mondeo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Mondeo consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Galant, which means that by driving the Ford Mondeo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Mondeo consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Galant. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford Mondeo 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: | 460'000 km | 520'000 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 Mitsubishi Galant engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 2 years | 46 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi Outlander, Mitsubishi Space Wagon | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Galant might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mitsubishi Galant 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: | 4.67 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.42 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Ford Mondeo is 4 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Galant, 1 cm wider, while the height of Ford Mondeo is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | 420 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1610 litres | 1400 litres | |
|
Ford Mondeo has more luggage capacity. Ford Mondeo has 120 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Galant. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford Mondeo (by 210 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Mondeo is 0.5 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Galant, which means Ford Mondeo can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`850 kg | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Mitsubishi Galant has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Ford Mondeo, so Mitsubishi Galant quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.3/10 | 5.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Mondeo has
|
Mitsubishi Galant has
| |