Ford Mondeo 2003 vs Chrysler Sebring 2001
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.7 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 145 HP | 203 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 262 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
|
Chrysler Sebring is a more dynamic driving. Ford Mondeo engine produces 58 HP less power than Chrysler Sebring, whereas torque is 72 NM less than Chrysler Sebring. Due to the lower power, Ford Mondeo reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.0 | 10.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.5 l/100km | 10.3 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Mondeo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Mondeo consumes 2.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler Sebring, which means that by driving the Ford Mondeo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 390 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Mondeo consumes 1.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler Sebring. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 560 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 730 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 580 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: | 560'000 km | 460'000 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 | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Chrysler 300C, Chrysler 300M, Dodge Intrepid | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Chrysler Sebring might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Chrysler Sebring 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: | 4.73 m | 4.84 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.39 m | |
| Ford Mondeo is 11 cm shorter than the Chrysler Sebring, 2 cm wider, while the height of Ford Mondeo is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 500 litres | 455 litres | |
|
Ford Mondeo has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Ford Mondeo has 45 litres more trunk space than the Chrysler Sebring. The Chrysler Sebring may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Mondeo is 0.1 metres less than that of the Chrysler Sebring. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`865 | 1`990 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Mondeo has
|
Chrysler Sebring has
| |