Chrysler Crossfire 2003 vs Toyota Celica 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.2 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 192 HP | |
| Torque: | 310 NM | 180 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.5 seconds | 7.4 seconds | |
|
Chrysler Crossfire is more dynamic to drive. Chrysler Crossfire engine produces 26 HP more power than Toyota Celica, whereas torque is 130 NM more than Toyota Celica. Thanks to more power Chrysler Crossfire reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.1 | 8.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.9 l/100km | 8.6 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Celica is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chrysler Crossfire consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chrysler Crossfire could require 255 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chrysler Crossfire consumes 2.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 590 km in combined cycle | 650 km in combined cycle | |
| 770 km on highway | 830 km on highway | ||
| 550 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota Celica gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Toyota Celica) 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 (Chrysler Crossfire) 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 280'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Chrysler Crossfire engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Mercedes C klase, Mercedes E klase, Mercedes ML | Used also on Toyota Corolla | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Chrysler Crossfire might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Chrysler Crossfire engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.06 m | 4.35 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.30 m | 1.32 m | |
| Chrysler Crossfire is 29 cm shorter than the Toyota Celica, 3 cm wider, while the height of Chrysler Crossfire is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 215 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chrysler Crossfire is 0.1 metres less than that of the Toyota Celica. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`665 | 1`200 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 6000 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler Crossfire has
|
Toyota Celica has
| |