Chrysler Grand Voyager 2001 vs Renault Trafic 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 135 HP | |
| Torque: | 312 NM | 310 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 12.6 seconds | |
|
Chrysler Grand Voyager is more dynamic to drive. Chrysler Grand Voyager engine produces 5 HP more power than Renault Trafic, whereas torque is 2 NM more than Renault Trafic. Thanks to more power Chrysler Grand Voyager reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 8.6 | |
|
The Chrysler Grand Voyager is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Chrysler Grand Voyager consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Trafic, which means that by driving the Chrysler Grand Voyager over 15,000 km in a year you can save 135 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 90 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 970 km in combined cycle | 1040 km in combined cycle | |
| 1150 km on highway | 1160 km on highway | ||
| Renault Trafic gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.09 m | 4.78 m | |
| Width: | 2.00 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.75 m | 1.94 m | |
|
Chrysler Grand Voyager is larger, but lower. Chrysler Grand Voyager is 31 cm longer than the Renault Trafic, 10 cm wider, while the height of Chrysler Grand Voyager is 19 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 920 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
4130 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`630 | 2`845 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 2800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler Grand Voyager has
|
Renault Trafic has
| |