HomeArticlesProductsKeywordsCompanies

Compare Chrysler 200 II vs Ford Mondeo 2 vs Ford Mondeo 4

Variants
2.4
3.6
3.6 AWD
1.8 110hp
1.8 125hp
1.8 130hp
2.0
2.0 AT
2.0D 115hp
2.0D 115hp AT
2.0D 90hp
2.0D 130hp
2.0D 130hp AT
2.2D
2.5
2.5 AT
3.0
ST
1.0T
1.5T
1.5T AT
1.5D
1.5D Econetic
1.6D
1.6D Econetic
2.0T 203hp AT
2.0T 240hp AT
Hybrid
2.0D 150hp
2.0D 150hp AWD
2.0D 150hp Econetic
2.0D 150hp AT
2.0D 180hp
2.0D 180hp Econetic
2.0D 180hp AT
2.0D 180hp AWD AT
2.0D 210hp AT

Capacity

Cargo Capacity
453 L / 16.0 cu-ft
500 L / 17.7 cu-ft
Fuel Capacity
60.0 L / 15.9 gal
Passengers
5
5
5

Chassis

Brakes | Front
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Brakes | Rear
Disc
Disc
Disc
Offroad | Approach Angle
13.5 deg
Offroad | Departure Angle
17.8 deg
Power Steering
Electric Steering
Hydraulic Steering
Suspension | Front
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
Suspension | Rear
Multi-link
Multi-link
Tire Size
215/55 R17
215/60 R16, 235/50 R17, 235/45 R18, 235/40 R19
Turning Circle
12.1 m / 39.8 ft
11.6 m / 38.0 ft

Construction

Battery | Capacity
1.4 kWh (gross)
Body Style
4-door Sedan
4-door Sedan

Dimensions

Ground Clearance
147 mm / 5.8 in
128 mm / 5.0 in
Size | Height
1491 mm / 58.7 in
1429 mm / 56.3 in
Size | Length
4884 mm / 192.3 in
4731 mm / 186.3 in
Size | Width
1871 mm / 73.7 in
1812 mm / 71.3 in
Track Width | Front
1578.0 mm / 62.1 in
1522.0 mm / 59.9 in
1599.0 mm / 63.0 in
Track Width | Rear
1576.0 mm / 62.0 in
1537.0 mm / 60.5 in
1595.0 mm / 62.8 in
Wheel Size
17 in
16 in
6.5J x 16, 7.5J x 17, 8J x 18, 8J x 19
Wheelbase
2742 mm / 108.0 in
2754 mm / 108.4 in
2850 mm / 112.2 in

Performance

Coefficient Of Drag
0.27

Powertrain

Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Transmission | Gears
9-speed
6-speed
Transmission | Type
Automatic

Production

Availability
2015 ~ 2017

Reviews

Neofiliac score
29%
16%
37%
Pros
  • Much improved styling
  • Good 0.27 drag coefficient
  • 9-speed automatic transmission
  • No more "throwing it at the wall" approach to engineering
  • Rather spacious
  • Down to very low 3.6L/100km fuel consumption
  • Good towing capacity
Cons
  • Stuck with MacPherson struts in the front
  • No powerful engine options
  • Stuck with basic suspension setup
  • Lack of refinement
  • No powerful engine options
  • Only available with small engines
  • Stuck with MacPherson struts in the front

Price

Offers (incl. referral links)
Remove
Remove
Remove
Add up to 4 products to the comparison using the search bar above
Information on this page is provided on an as-is basis. No warranty on accuracy is implied. This page may contain affiliate links to third-party merchants such as Amazon and eBay. If you make a purchase using the supplied link, we may receive a commission. Neofiliac places the utmost respect for your privacy. We use no cookie whatsoever beyond that needed for the proper functioning of the website.