Chrysler Grand Voyager 2004 vs Kia Carnival 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.8 Diesel | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Chrysler Grand Voyager) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Kia Carnival) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 149 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 360 NM | 224 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 15.5 seconds | |
|
Chrysler Grand Voyager is more dynamic to drive. Chrysler Grand Voyager engine produces 1 HP less power than Kia Carnival, but torque is 136 NM more than Kia Carnival. Despite less power, Chrysler Grand Voyager reaches 100 km/h speed 3.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.5 | 12.4 | |
|
The Chrysler Grand Voyager is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Chrysler Grand Voyager consumes 3.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Kia Carnival, which means that by driving the Chrysler Grand Voyager over 15,000 km in a year you can save 585 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 880 km in combined cycle | 600 km in combined cycle | |
| 1110 km on highway | 750 km on highway | ||
| Chrysler Grand Voyager 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: | 440'000 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: | 7 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Chrysler Voyager, Jeep Cherokee | 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. Kia Carnival might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.10 m | 4.93 m | |
| Width: | 2.00 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.75 m | 1.74 m | |
|
Chrysler Grand Voyager is larger. Chrysler Grand Voyager is 18 cm longer than the Kia Carnival, 10 cm wider, while the height of Chrysler Grand Voyager is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 920 litres | 302 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
4130 litres | no data | |
|
Chrysler Grand Voyager has more luggage capacity. Chrysler Grand Voyager has 618 litres more trunk space than the Kia Carnival. | |||
| 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: | 2`630 kg | 2`555 kg | |
| Net weight: | 2`030 kg | 2`013 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 600 kg | 542 kg | |
| Chrysler Grand Voyager load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 10 procentiem more than Kia Carnival. Therefore, Chrysler Grand Voyager is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler Grand Voyager has
|
Kia Carnival has
| |