2004 Dodge Neon vs. 2009 Ford Taurus
To start off, 2009 Ford Taurus is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Dodge Neon. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Dodge Neon would be higher. At 3,496 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Ford Taurus is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Ford Taurus (263 HP @ 6251 RPM) has 131 more horse power than 2004 Dodge Neon. (132 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Ford Taurus should accelerate faster than 2004 Dodge Neon. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Dodge Neon weights approximately 205 kg more than 2009 Ford Taurus.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2009 Ford Taurus (338 Nm) has 162 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Dodge Neon. (176 Nm). This means 2009 Ford Taurus will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Dodge Neon.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Dodge Neon | 2009 Ford Taurus | |
| Make | Dodge | Ford |
| Model | Neon | Taurus |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1999 cc | 3496 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 132 HP | 263 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 6251 RPM |
| Torque | 176 Nm | 338 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.3:1 | 9.7:1 |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1171 kg | 966 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4440 mm | 5130 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1900 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1570 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2670 mm | 2870 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 6.5 L/100km | 8.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 8.1 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.4 L/100km | 6.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 47 L | 76 L |
