DETAILED CAR COMPARISON

1996 Mitsubishi Sigma vs 1996 Ford Taurus Comparison

Compare technical specifications, scores and everyday-use differences side by side.

VS
WINNER

Ford Taurus

Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points.

64.5–65.25
SPECIFICATION GROUPS

Every difference between the two cars

Basic Specifications

MitsubishiMakeFord
SigmaModelTaurus
1996Model year1996
SedanBody typeEstate
5Seats5
4Doors5

Performance

9,0 s0–100 km/h—
220 km/hTop speed180 km/h
2972 ccEngine displacement2986 cc
177 HPPower147 HP
251 NmTorque230 Nm
6Cylinders6

Fuel & Consumption

PetrolFuel typePetrol
72 ltFuel tank61 lt
—Urban consumption11,8 lt
—Extra-urban consumption8,1 lt
10,3 ltAverage consumption—

Transmission & Chassis

Front-wheel driveDrivetrainFront-wheel drive
5Gears4
205/65 R15Tyre size205/65 R15
YesABSYes

Dimensions

4750 mmLength5070 mm
1775 mmWidth1854 mm
1435 mmHeight1463 mm
1468 KgWeight1579 Kg
2720 mmWheelbase2756 mm

E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note

1996 Mitsubishi Sigma and 1996 Ford Taurus approach the same decision from different angles. We compare the exact versions so changes in engine, transmission, dimensions and equipment are not hidden behind the model names.

Overall, Ford Taurus leads the E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points. The score provides a consistent summary, while the best choice can still change with priorities such as urban efficiency, luggage space, performance or equipment.

SIMILAR COMPARISONS

Similar comparisons

Explore related comparisons featuring cars from this matchup.

Comments are loading…