Renault Laguna 2013 vs Ford Mondeo 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Ford Mondeo is a more dynamic driving. Renault Laguna engine produces 30 HP less power than Ford Mondeo, whereas torque is 80 NM less than Ford Mondeo. Due to the lower power, Renault Laguna reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.2 | 5.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.6 l/100km | 6.8 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Laguna is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Laguna consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Mondeo, which means that by driving the Renault Laguna over 15,000 km in a year you can save 210 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Laguna consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Mondeo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 68 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1610 km in combined cycle | 1250 km in combined cycle | |
| 1830 km on highway | 1480 km on highway | ||
| 1210 km with real consumption | 1020 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Laguna gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 22 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster, Nissan Juke | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Ford Focus, Ford Galaxy, Ford C-Max, Ford S-Max | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Laguna might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Ford Mondeo 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. | |||
| Renault Laguna 2013 1.5 engine: The engine has many modifications, is sufficiently common and spare parts are available. The fuel consumption/power ratio is good. The fuel injection system can be a problem and the timing belt change interval ... More about Renault Laguna 2013 1.5 engine Ford Mondeo 2010 2.0 engine: In early production engines, the camshaft timing chain often stretched, requiring timely replacement to avoid potential issues. The fuel system, equipped with piezo injectors, is highly sensitive to fuel ... More about Ford Mondeo 2010 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.70 m | 4.78 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.50 m | |
|
Renault Laguna is smaller. Renault Laguna is 8 cm shorter than the Ford Mondeo, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Laguna is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 450 litres | 486 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1390 litres | |
|
Ford Mondeo has more luggage space. Renault Laguna has 36 litres less trunk space than the Ford Mondeo. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Laguna is 0.3 metres less than that of the Ford Mondeo. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`936 | 2`230 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Renault Laguna has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Mondeo has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Renault Laguna, so Renault Laguna quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4600 | 5000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Laguna has
|
Ford Mondeo has
| |