Chrysler PT Cruiser 2002 vs Honda Civic 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.1 Diesel | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 121 HP | 160 HP | |
| Torque: | 300 NM | 179 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.1 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Chrysler PT Cruiser engine produces 39 HP less power than Honda Civic, but torque is 121 NM more than Honda Civic. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 7.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.5 l/100km | 8.5 l/100km | |
|
The Chrysler PT Cruiser is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chrysler PT Cruiser consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda Civic, which means that by driving the Chrysler PT Cruiser over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chrysler PT Cruiser consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda Civic. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 57 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 660 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 810 km on highway | ||
| 760 km with real consumption | 580 km with real consumption | ||
| Chrysler PT Cruiser gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Honda Accord, Honda FR-V, Honda Stream | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Honda Civic might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Chrysler PT Cruiser engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.39 m | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.50 m | |
| Chrysler PT Cruiser is 11 cm longer than the Honda Civic, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Chrysler PT Cruiser is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chrysler PT Cruiser is 0.5 metres more than that of the Honda Civic, which means Chrysler PT Cruiser can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`000 | 1`200 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Honda Civic has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chrysler PT Cruiser has serious deffects in 60 percent more cases than Honda Civic, so Honda Civic quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.3/10 | 8.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler PT Cruiser has
|
Honda Civic has
| |