Chrysler 300C 2005 vs Honda Accord 2003
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 510 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.9 seconds | 10.3 seconds | |
|
Chrysler 300C is more dynamic to drive. Chrysler 300C engine produces 78 HP more power than Honda Accord, whereas torque is 170 NM more than Honda Accord. Thanks to more power Chrysler 300C reaches 100 km/h speed 2.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.3 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.1 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Honda Accord is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chrysler 300C consumes 2.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda Accord, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chrysler 300C could require 375 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chrysler 300C consumes 2.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda Accord. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 68 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 1120 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 1350 km on highway | ||
| 740 km with real consumption | 980 km with real consumption | ||
| Honda Accord 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: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Honda Accord) 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 350'000 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 300C engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Jeep Grand Cherokee, Jeep Commander | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Honda Civic, Honda CR-V, Honda FR-V | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Honda Accord might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Chrysler 300C 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. | |||
| 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 Honda Accord 2003 2.2 engine: Honda’s first diesel engine featured an aluminum block, a variable-geometry turbocharger, second-generation Bosch Common Rail injection, 16-valve cylinder head, and a balance shaft integrated into the crankcase. The ... More about Honda Accord 2003 2.2 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.02 m | 4.75 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.56 m | 1.47 m | |
|
Chrysler 300C is larger. Chrysler 300C is 27 cm longer than the Honda Accord, 12 cm wider, while the height of Chrysler 300C is 9 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 630 litres | 576 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1602 litres | 1657 litres | |
| Chrysler 300C has 54 litres more trunk space than the Honda Accord. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Honda Accord (by 55 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chrysler 300C is 0.4 metres more than that of the Honda Accord, which means Chrysler 300C can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`360 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 4800 | 1400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.0/10 | 8.0/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler 300C has
|
Honda Accord has
| |