Chrysler Sebring 2001 vs Skoda Superb 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.7 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 203 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 262 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.3 seconds | 9.5 seconds | |
|
Chrysler Sebring is more dynamic to drive. Chrysler Sebring engine produces 53 HP more power than Skoda Superb, whereas torque is 52 NM more than Skoda Superb. Thanks to more power Chrysler Sebring reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.6 | 8.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.3 l/100km | 8.8 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Superb is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chrysler Sebring consumes 2.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Superb, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chrysler Sebring could require 345 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chrysler Sebring consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Superb. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 560 km in combined cycle | 740 km in combined cycle | |
| 730 km on highway | 950 km on highway | ||
| 580 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Skoda Superb gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 460'000 km | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Chrysler 300C, Chrysler 300M, Dodge Intrepid | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Audi A4, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Skoda Superb 2002 1.8 engine: The weakest link in this engine is the turbine, whose failure is contributed to by a faulty catalytic converter. The oil pump and chain tensioner also tend to have problems. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.84 m | 4.80 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.47 m | |
|
Chrysler Sebring is larger, but lower. Chrysler Sebring is 4 cm longer than the Skoda Superb, 3 cm wider, while the height of Chrysler Sebring is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 455 litres | 577 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1228 litres | |
|
Skoda Superb has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, This could mean that the Chrysler Sebring uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chrysler Sebring is 0.6 metres less than that of the Skoda Superb, which means Chrysler Sebring can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`990 kg | 1`865 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`458 kg | 1`275 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 532 kg | 590 kg | |
| Chrysler Sebring load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 11 procentiem less than Skoda Superb. Therefore, Skoda Superb is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler Sebring has
|
Skoda Superb has
| |