Chevrolet Astro 1985 vs Chrysler Grand Voyager 1992
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.3 Petrol | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Chevrolet Astro) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Chrysler Grand Voyager) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 167 HP | 118 HP | |
| Torque: | 319 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 12.5 seconds | |
| Chevrolet Astro engine produces 49 HP more power than Chrysler Grand Voyager, whereas torque is 69 NM more than Chrysler Grand Voyager. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 13.1 | 7.7 | |
|
The Chrysler Grand Voyager is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Chevrolet Astro consumes 5.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler Grand Voyager, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chevrolet Astro could require 810 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 102 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 970 km in combined cycle | |
| Chrysler Grand Voyager gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Chrysler Grand Voyager) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Chevrolet Astro) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 4.90 m | |
| Width: | 1.97 m | 1.83 m | |
| Height: | 1.94 m | 1.74 m | |
| Chevrolet Astro is 41 cm shorter than the Chrysler Grand Voyager, 14 cm wider, while the height of Chevrolet Astro is 20 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 3990 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 3990 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 13.2 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`699 | 2`550 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2800 | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Astro has
|
Chrysler Grand Voyager has
| |