Chrysler Grand Voyager 1992 vs Chevrolet Astro 1985
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 4.3 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 (Chevrolet Astro) 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." | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 118 HP | 167 HP | |
| Torque: | 250 NM | 319 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Chrysler Grand Voyager engine produces 49 HP less power than Chevrolet Astro, whereas torque is 69 NM less than Chevrolet Astro. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 13.1 | |
|
The Chrysler Grand Voyager is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Chrysler Grand Voyager consumes 5.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Astro, which means that by driving the Chrysler Grand Voyager over 15,000 km in a year you can save 810 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 102 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 970 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 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. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Chrysler Grand Voyager) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Chevrolet Astro) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.90 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.83 m | 1.97 m | |
| Height: | 1.74 m | 1.94 m | |
| Chrysler Grand Voyager is 41 cm longer than the Chevrolet Astro, 14 cm narrower, while the height of Chrysler Grand Voyager is 20 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 3990 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
3990 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 13.2 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`550 | 2`699 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 2800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler Grand Voyager has
|
Chevrolet Astro has
| |