Chrysler Crossfire 2003 vs Ford Mustang 2005
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.2 Petrol | 4.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 304 HP | |
| Torque: | 310 NM | 427 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.5 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Chrysler Crossfire engine produces 86 HP less power than Ford Mustang, whereas torque is 117 NM less than Ford Mustang. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.1 | 13.0 | |
|
The Chrysler Crossfire is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Chrysler Crossfire consumes 2.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Mustang, which means that by driving the Chrysler Crossfire over 15,000 km in a year you can save 435 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 61 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 590 km in combined cycle | 460 km in combined cycle | |
| 770 km on highway | 670 km on highway | ||
| Chrysler Crossfire gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.06 m | 4.77 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.30 m | 1.39 m | |
|
Chrysler Crossfire is smaller. Chrysler Crossfire is 71 cm shorter than the Ford Mustang, 11 cm narrower, while the height of Chrysler Crossfire is 9 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 215 litres | 350 litres | |
|
Ford Mustang has more luggage space. Chrysler Crossfire has 135 litres less trunk space than the Ford Mustang. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`665 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 6000 | 10 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler Crossfire has
|
Ford Mustang has
| |