Chrysler 300C 2005 vs Chrysler Pacifica 2006
| Body: | Estate car / wagon | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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: | 3.0 Diesel | 3.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 253 HP | |
| Torque: | 510 NM | 339 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.9 seconds | 10 seconds | |
|
Chrysler 300C is more dynamic to drive. Chrysler 300C engine produces 35 HP less power than Chrysler Pacifica, but torque is 171 NM more than Chrysler Pacifica. Despite less power, Chrysler 300C reaches 100 km/h speed 2.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.3 | 11.9 | |
|
The Chrysler 300C is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Chrysler 300C consumes 3.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler Pacifica, which means that by driving the Chrysler 300C over 15,000 km in a year you can save 540 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 68 litres | 87 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 730 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 810 km on highway | ||
| Chrysler 300C gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 3 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Jeep Grand Cherokee, Jeep Commander | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Chrysler 300C might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Chrysler 300C 2005 3.0 engine: The main issues with this diesel engine stem from the fuel system and its sensitive piezo injectors. These injectors are known for being highly demanding in terms of fuel quality, which can lead to performance ... More about Chrysler 300C 2005 3.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.02 m | 5.05 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 2.01 m | |
| Height: | 1.56 m | 1.69 m | |
|
Chrysler 300C is smaller. Chrysler 300C is 3 cm shorter than the Chrysler Pacifica, 13 cm narrower, while the height of Chrysler 300C is 13 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 5 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 630 litres | 370 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 370 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 630 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1602 litres | 2250 litres | |
| The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Chrysler Pacifica (by 648 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 12.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chrysler 300C is 0.1 metres less than that of the Chrysler Pacifica. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`360 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 4800 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler 300C has
|
Chrysler Pacifica has
| |