Chrysler Grand Voyager 1996 vs Seat Alhambra 1996
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.3 Petrol | 2.0 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 | 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 275 NM | 170 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 15.4 seconds | |
|
Chrysler Grand Voyager is more dynamic to drive. Chrysler Grand Voyager engine produces 40 HP more power than Seat Alhambra, whereas torque is 105 NM more than Seat Alhambra. Thanks to more power Chrysler Grand Voyager reaches 100 km/h speed 3.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 13.3 | 9.9 | |
|
The Seat Alhambra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Chrysler Grand Voyager consumes 3.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Seat Alhambra, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chrysler Grand Voyager could require 510 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 560 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 700 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
| Seat Alhambra 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 | 580'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Chrysler Voyager, Dodge Grand Caravan, Chrysler Concorde | 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 Grand Voyager might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.07 m | 4.62 m | |
| Width: | 1.92 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.74 m | 1.73 m | |
|
Chrysler Grand Voyager is larger. Chrysler Grand Voyager is 45 cm longer than the Seat Alhambra, 11 cm wider, while the height of Chrysler Grand Voyager is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 671 litres | 256 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 256 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 671 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
4880 litres | 852 litres | |
| The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Chrysler Grand Voyager (by 4028 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 11.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chrysler Grand Voyager is 0.3 metres more than that of the Seat Alhambra. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`500 kg | 2`400 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`875 kg | 1`638 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 625 kg | 762 kg | |
| Chrysler Grand Voyager load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 22 procentiem less than Seat Alhambra. Therefore, Seat Alhambra is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler Grand Voyager has
|
Seat Alhambra has
| |