Chrysler 300C 2005 vs Rover 75 2004
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 510 NM | 260 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.9 seconds | 12.3 seconds | |
|
Chrysler 300C is more dynamic to drive. Chrysler 300C engine produces 102 HP more power than Rover 75, whereas torque is 250 NM more than Rover 75. Thanks to more power Chrysler 300C reaches 100 km/h speed 4.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.3 | 5.8 | |
|
The Rover 75 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Chrysler 300C consumes 2.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Rover 75, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chrysler 300C could require 375 litres more fuel. | |||
| 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 | 1380 km on highway | ||
| Rover 75 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Rover 75) 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. | |||
| 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 | 4.79 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.56 m | 1.39 m | |
|
Chrysler 300C is larger. Chrysler 300C is 23 cm longer than the Rover 75, 10 cm wider, while the height of Chrysler 300C is 17 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 630 litres | 400 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1602 litres | 1222 litres | |
|
Chrysler 300C has more luggage capacity. Chrysler 300C has 230 litres more trunk space than the Rover 75. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Chrysler 300C (by 380 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chrysler 300C is 0.6 metres more than that of the Rover 75, which means Chrysler 300C can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`360 | 2`090 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 4800 | 1600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler 300C has
|
Rover 75 has
| |