Chrysler Grand Voyager 1999 vs Toyota Previa 2001
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| 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: | 114 HP | 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 262 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.8 seconds | 13.6 seconds | |
|
Toyota Previa is a more dynamic driving. Chrysler Grand Voyager engine produces 2 HP less power than Toyota Previa, but torque is 12 NM more than Toyota Previa. Due to the lower power, Chrysler Grand Voyager reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.7 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Previa is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chrysler Grand Voyager consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Previa, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chrysler Grand Voyager could require 225 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chrysler Grand Voyager consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Previa. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 860 km in combined cycle | 1040 km in combined cycle | |
| 1040 km on highway | 1220 km on highway | ||
| 890 km with real consumption | 1000 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota Previa gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 280'000 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 Grand Voyager engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Jeep Grand Cherokee, Chrysler Voyager, Jeep Cherokee | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Corolla, Toyota RAV4, Toyota Corolla Verso | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota Previa might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Chrysler Grand Voyager 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. | |||
| Toyota Previa 2001 2.0 engine: The engine was known for its solid technical characteristics.
One of its drawbacks is the lack of hydraulic lifters, requiring periodic valve clearance adjustments. The next-generation 1AD-FTV engine was equipped with ... More about Toyota Previa 2001 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.07 m | 4.75 m | |
| Width: | 1.92 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.74 m | 1.77 m | |
|
Chrysler Grand Voyager is larger, but slightly lower. Chrysler Grand Voyager is 32 cm longer than the Toyota Previa, 13 cm wider, while the height of Chrysler Grand Voyager is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 2370 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chrysler Grand Voyager is 0.8 metres more than that of the Toyota Previa, which means Chrysler Grand Voyager can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`500 | 2`200 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler Grand Voyager has
|
Toyota Previa has
| |