Ford Mondeo 2003 vs Opel Vectra 2003
| Body: | Sedan | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 145 HP | 175 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 265 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.4 seconds | 9.1 seconds | |
|
Opel Vectra is a more dynamic driving. Ford Mondeo engine produces 30 HP less power than Opel Vectra, whereas torque is 75 NM less than Opel Vectra. Due to the lower power, Ford Mondeo reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 | 8.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.0 l/100km | 9.5 l/100km | |
|
The Opel Vectra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Mondeo consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Opel Vectra, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Mondeo could require 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Mondeo consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Opel Vectra. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 61 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 800 km on highway | 920 km on highway | ||
| 590 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| Opel Vectra gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 400'000 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 | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Opel Signum | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Opel Vectra might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Opel Vectra 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. | |||
| Opel Vectra 2003 2.0 engine: The engine is identical to Saab B207L engine. It features an aluminum alloy block with cast iron liners and a chain-driven timing system without variable valve timing.It has two balance shafts with a separate ... More about Opel Vectra 2003 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.73 m | 4.60 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Ford Mondeo is larger, but slightly lower. Ford Mondeo is 13 cm longer than the Opel Vectra, 1 cm wider, while the height of Ford Mondeo is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 500 litres | 500 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1360 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Mondeo is 0.1 metres more than that of the Opel Vectra. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`865 | 1`960 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Ford Mondeo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Opel Vectra has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Ford Mondeo, so Ford Mondeo quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.5/10 | 7.7/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Mondeo has
|
Opel Vectra has
| |