Chrysler Sebring 2003 vs Honda Accord 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 141 HP | 155 HP | |
| Torque: | 188 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
|
Honda Accord is a more dynamic driving. Chrysler Sebring engine produces 14 HP less power than Honda Accord, whereas torque is 2 NM less than Honda Accord. Due to the lower power, Chrysler Sebring reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.1 | 7.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.5 l/100km | 8.5 l/100km | |
|
The Honda Accord is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chrysler Sebring consumes 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda Accord, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chrysler Sebring could require 210 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chrysler Sebring consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda Accord. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 1040 km on highway | ||
| 630 km with real consumption | 760 km with real consumption | ||
| Honda Accord gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 370'000 km | 420'000 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 Honda Accord engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Chrysler PT Cruiser, Mitsubishi Eclipse | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda CR-V, Honda FR-V, Honda Stream | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Honda Accord might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Chrysler Sebring 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. | |||
| Honda Accord 2003 2.0 engine: In 2001, Honda introduced the K-series engine lineup, featuring an aluminum block with an open-deck design and cast-iron cylinder liners. It utilizes a port fuel injection system, a 16-valve aluminum cylinder head without hydraulic lifters, individual ignition coils, a VTC cam ... More about Honda Accord 2003 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.84 m | 4.66 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Chrysler Sebring is larger, but lower. Chrysler Sebring is 18 cm longer than the Honda Accord, 3 cm wider, while the height of Chrysler Sebring is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 455 litres | 459 litres | |
| Chrysler Sebring has 4 litres less trunk space than the Honda Accord. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chrysler Sebring is 0.2 metres more than that of the Honda Accord. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`920 | 1`920 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler Sebring has
|
Honda Accord has
| |