Toyota Celica 2002 vs Chrysler Crossfire 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 3.2 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 192 HP | 218 HP | |
| Torque: | 180 NM | 310 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.4 seconds | 6.5 seconds | |
|
Chrysler Crossfire is a more dynamic driving. Toyota Celica engine produces 26 HP less power than Chrysler Crossfire, whereas torque is 130 NM less than Chrysler Crossfire. Due to the lower power, Toyota Celica reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.4 | 10.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 10.9 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Celica is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Toyota Celica consumes 1.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler Crossfire, which means that by driving the Toyota Celica over 15,000 km in a year you can save 255 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Toyota Celica consumes 2.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler Crossfire. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 590 km in combined cycle | |
| 830 km on highway | 770 km on highway | ||
| 630 km with real consumption | 550 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota Celica gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| 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: | 280'000 km | 480'000 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: | 12 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Toyota Corolla | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Mercedes C klase, Mercedes E klase, Mercedes ML | |
| 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: | no | yes | |
| 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: | 4.35 m | 4.06 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.32 m | 1.30 m | |
| Toyota Celica is 29 cm longer than the Chrysler Crossfire, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Toyota Celica is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 215 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota Celica is 0.1 metres more than that of the Chrysler Crossfire. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`200 | 1`665 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2600 | 6000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Celica has
|
Chrysler Crossfire has
| |