Chrysler PT Cruiser 2004 vs Seat Altea 2004
| Body: | Hatchback | Minivan / MPV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.4 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 223 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 332 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.5 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
|
Chrysler PT Cruiser is more dynamic to drive. Chrysler PT Cruiser engine produces 73 HP more power than Seat Altea, whereas torque is 132 NM more than Seat Altea. Thanks to more power Chrysler PT Cruiser reaches 100 km/h speed 2.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.0 | 7.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.8 l/100km | 9.1 l/100km | |
|
The Seat Altea is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chrysler PT Cruiser consumes 2.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Seat Altea, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chrysler PT Cruiser could require 345 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chrysler PT Cruiser consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Seat Altea. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 57 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 570 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 690 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 520 km with real consumption | 600 km with real consumption | ||
| Seat Altea gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 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 Seat Altea engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Dodge Neon | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Audi A3, Seat Leon | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Seat Altea might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.39 m | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.57 m | |
| Chrysler PT Cruiser is 11 cm longer than the Seat Altea, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Chrysler PT Cruiser is 15 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chrysler PT Cruiser is 0.2 metres more than that of the Seat Altea. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`000 | 1`400 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | average | |
| Seat Altea has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chrysler PT Cruiser has serious deffects in 95 percent more cases than Seat Altea, so Seat Altea quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 2400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.3/10 | 7.9/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler PT Cruiser has
|
Seat Altea has
| |