Chrysler 300C 2011 vs Chrysler 300M 1998
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.6 Petrol | 3.5 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 286 HP | 254 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7 seconds | 8.8 seconds | |
|
Chrysler 300C is more dynamic to drive. Chrysler 300C engine produces 32 HP more power than Chrysler 300M, the torque is the same for both cars. Thanks to more power Chrysler 300C reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.7 | 10.7 | |
|
The Chrysler 300C is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Chrysler 300C consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler 300M, which means that by driving the Chrysler 300C over 15,000 km in a year you can save 150 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 72 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 590 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 750 km on highway | ||
| Chrysler 300C gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Chrysler 300M) 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 300C) 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.07 m | 5.00 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.92 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.42 m | |
| Chrysler 300C is 7 cm longer than the Chrysler 300M, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Chrysler 300C is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 462 litres | 530 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
465 litres | 530 litres | |
|
Chrysler 300M has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Chrysler 300C has 68 litres less trunk space than the Chrysler 300M. This could mean that the Chrysler 300C uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Chrysler 300M (by 65 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 11.5 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`359 | 2`120 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 11 200 | 1400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler 300C has
|
Chrysler 300M has
| |