Opel Omega 1989 vs Ford Sierra 1990
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Opel Omega is available only with rear wheel drive, while Ford Sierra can be equipped with rear wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive. | |||
| Engines: | 2.0 - 3.6 | 1.6 - 2.0 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 73 - 377 HP | 71 - 220 HP | |
| Torque: | 138 - 568 NM | 119 - 290 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 5.4 - 19 seconds | 6.9 - 16.4 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 - 11.0 | 6.4 - 10.6 | |
|
Opel Omega petrol engines consumes on average 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than Ford Sierra. On average, Opel Omega equipped with diesel engines consume 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Sierra. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.74 m | 4.47 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.41 m | |
|
Opel Omega is larger. Opel Omega is 27 cm longer than the Ford Sierra, 6 cm wider, while the height of Opel Omega is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 520 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
870 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Opel Omega is 0.9 metres more than that of the Ford Sierra, which means Opel Omega can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`942 | ~ 1`193 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 3000 | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Ford Sierra has
| |