Ford F150 2010 vs Chrysler 300C 2006
| Body: | Crossover / SUV | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 6.2 Petrol | 6.1 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 411 HP | 425 HP | |
| Torque: | 588 NM | 570 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 5 seconds | |
| Ford F150 engine produces 14 HP less power than Chrysler 300C, but torque is 18 NM more than Chrysler 300C. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 15.7 | 14.0 | |
|
The Chrysler 300C is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Ford F150 consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler 300C, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford F150 could require 255 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 98 litres | 71 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 500 km in combined cycle | |
| 740 km on highway | 710 km on highway | ||
| Ford F150 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.89 m | 5.02 m | |
| Width: | 2.01 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.90 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Ford F150 is larger. Ford F150 is 87 cm longer than the Chrysler 300C, 13 cm wider, while the height of Ford F150 is 42 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 504 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 504 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 12 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`425 | 2`355 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 16 800 | 3800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford F150 has
|
Chrysler 300C has
| |