Opel Omega 1995 vs Honda Accord 1995
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 116 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 175 NM | 184 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14 seconds | 10.8 seconds | |
|
Honda Accord is a more dynamic driving. Opel Omega engine produces 20 HP less power than Honda Accord, whereas torque is 9 NM less than Honda Accord. Due to the lower power, Opel Omega reaches 100 km/h speed 3.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.2 | 9.0 | |
| Opel Omega consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda Accord, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Opel Omega could require 30 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 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 (Honda Accord) 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 | |||
| 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 Opel Omega engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Honda CR-V | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Honda Accord 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: | 4.82 m | 4.77 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.50 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Opel Omega is larger. Opel Omega is 5 cm longer than the Honda Accord, 1 cm wider, while the height of Opel Omega is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1800 litres | 739 litres | |
|
Opel Omega has more luggage capacity. Opel Omega has 110 litres more trunk space than the Honda Accord. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Opel Omega (by 1061 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Opel Omega is 0.1 metres less than that of the Honda Accord. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`010 | 1`880 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Honda Accord has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Opel Omega has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Honda Accord, so Honda Accord quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 3800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Opel Omega has
|
Honda Accord has
| |