Mitsubishi Galant 1997 vs Ford Mondeo 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 HP | 145 HP | |
| Torque: | 178 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Galant engine produces 9 HP less power than Ford Mondeo, whereas torque is 12 NM less than Ford Mondeo. Despite less power, Mitsubishi Galant reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.5 | 8.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.3 l/100km | 8.5 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Mondeo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Galant consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Mondeo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Galant could require 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Galant consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Mondeo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 59 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 730 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 520'000 km | 560'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 46 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi Outlander, Mitsubishi Space Wagon | Used only for this car | |
| 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: | yes | no | |
| 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: | 4.63 m | 4.73 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.43 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Galant is smaller. Mitsubishi Galant is 10 cm shorter than the Ford Mondeo, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Galant is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 470 litres | 500 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1400 litres | no data | |
|
Ford Mondeo has more luggage space. Mitsubishi Galant has 30 litres less trunk space than the Ford Mondeo. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 11.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Galant is 0.3 metres less than that of the Ford Mondeo. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`850 | 1`865 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Mitsubishi Galant has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Mondeo has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Galant, so Mitsubishi Galant quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 5.8/10 | 7.5/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Galant has
|
Ford Mondeo has
| |