Ford Mondeo 2000 vs Skoda Superb 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Double-row 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: | 90 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 245 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.8 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
Skoda Superb is a more dynamic driving. Ford Mondeo engine produces 73 HP less power than Skoda Superb, whereas torque is 105 NM less than Skoda Superb. Due to the lower power, Ford Mondeo reaches 100 km/h speed 2.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 7.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.8 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Mondeo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Mondeo consumes 1.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Superb, which means that by driving the Ford Mondeo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 270 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Mondeo consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Superb. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 56 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 940 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 1210 km on highway | 1080 km on highway | ||
| 820 km with real consumption | 810 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: | 350'000 km | 440'000 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 Skoda Superb engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Audi A4 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Skoda Superb might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.73 m | 4.80 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.47 m | |
| Ford Mondeo is 7 cm shorter than the Skoda Superb, 5 cm wider, while the height of Ford Mondeo is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 500 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Mondeo is 0.7 metres less than that of the Skoda Superb, which means Ford Mondeo can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`980 | 1`600 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Skoda Superb has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Mondeo has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Skoda Superb, so Skoda Superb quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.5/10 | 9.0/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Mondeo has
|
Skoda Superb has
| |