Chrysler Grand Voyager 1996 vs Kia Carnival 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.3 Petrol | 2.5 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: | 156 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 275 NM | 224 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 13.8 seconds | |
|
Chrysler Grand Voyager is more dynamic to drive. Chrysler Grand Voyager engine produces 6 HP more power than Kia Carnival, whereas torque is 51 NM more than Kia Carnival. Thanks to more power Chrysler Grand Voyager reaches 100 km/h speed 2.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 13.3 | 10.9 | |
|
The Kia Carnival is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Chrysler Grand Voyager consumes 2.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Kia Carnival, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chrysler Grand Voyager could require 360 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 560 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 700 km on highway | 830 km on highway | ||
| Kia Carnival 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: | 560'000 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 Grand Voyager engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Chrysler Voyager, Dodge Grand Caravan, Chrysler Concorde | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Land Rover Freelander, Rover 75, Rover 400 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Chrysler Grand Voyager might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.07 m | 4.93 m | |
| Width: | 1.92 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.74 m | 1.74 m | |
|
Chrysler Grand Voyager is larger. Chrysler Grand Voyager is 15 cm longer than the Kia Carnival, 2 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 671 litres | 302 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
4880 litres | 3320 litres | |
|
Chrysler Grand Voyager has more luggage capacity. Chrysler Grand Voyager has 369 litres more trunk space than the Kia Carnival. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Chrysler Grand Voyager (by 1560 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 13 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chrysler Grand Voyager is 1 metres less than that of the Kia Carnival, which means Chrysler Grand Voyager can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`500 | 2`555 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler Grand Voyager has
|
Kia Carnival has
| |