Ford Mustang 2005 vs Chrysler 300C 2004

 
Ford Mustang
2005 - 2009
Chrysler 300C
2004 - 2011
Body: CoupeSedan
Gearbox: ManualAutomatic
Engine: 4.0 Petrol3.5 Petrol

Performance

Power: 212 HP253 HP
Torque: 325 NM340 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 7 seconds9.2 seconds
Ford Mustang engine produces 41 HP less power than Chrysler 300C, whereas torque is 15 NM less than Chrysler 300C. Despite less power, Ford Mustang reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds faster.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 10.411.0
Real fuel consumption: 10.8 l/100km10.9 l/100km
By specification Ford Mustang consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler 300C, which means that by driving the Ford Mustang over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel.
By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Mustang consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler 300C.
Fuel tank capacity: 61 litres68 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 580 km in combined cycle610 km in combined cycle
720 km on highway820 km on highway
560 km with real consumption620 km with real consumption
Chrysler 300C gets more mileage on one fuel tank.

Dimensions

Length: 4.77 m5.02 m
Width: 1.88 m1.88 m
Height: 1.39 m1.48 m
Ford Mustang is smaller.
Ford Mustang is 26 cm shorter than the Chrysler 300C, width is practically the same , while the height of Ford Mustang is 10 cm lower.
Trunk capacity: 350 litres504 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
no data504 litres
Chrysler 300C has more luggage space.
Ford Mustang has 154 litres less trunk space than the Chrysler 300C.
Turning diameter: no data12 meters
Gross weight (kg): no data2`180
Safety: no datano data
Quality: no datano data
Average price (€): 11 6004200
Pros and Cons: Ford Mustang has
  • more dynamic
Chrysler 300C has
  • more power
  • more full fuel tank mileage
  • roomier boot
  • lower price
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv