Opel Omega 1999 vs Toyota Corolla 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | 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: | 100 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 205 NM | 215 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 16 seconds | 12.6 seconds | |
|
Toyota Corolla is a more dynamic driving. Opel Omega engine produces 10 HP more power than Toyota Corolla, but torque is 10 NM less than Toyota Corolla. Despite the higher power, Opel Omega reaches 100 km/h speed 3.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.7 l/100km | 6.1 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Corolla is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Opel Omega consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Corolla, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Opel Omega could require 120 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Opel Omega consumes 1.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Corolla. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1110 km in combined cycle | 930 km in combined cycle | |
| 1440 km on highway | 1100 km on highway | ||
| 970 km with real consumption | 900 km with real consumption | ||
| Opel Omega gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Toyota Corolla) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Opel Omega) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 3 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Opel Vectra | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota RAV4, Toyota Corolla Verso | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota Corolla might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Opel Omega 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: | 4.90 m | 4.38 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.50 m | 1.50 m | |
|
Opel Omega is larger. Opel Omega is 52 cm longer than the Toyota Corolla, 7 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1800 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Opel Omega is 0.8 metres more than that of the Toyota Corolla, which means Opel Omega can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`265 | 1`300 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Toyota Corolla has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Opel Omega has serious deffects in 225 percent more cases than Toyota Corolla, so Toyota Corolla quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Opel Omega has
|
Toyota Corolla has
| |