Chrysler PT Cruiser 2006 vs Volvo C30 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 1.6 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 109 HP | |
| Torque: | 300 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.2 seconds | 11.9 seconds | |
|
Chrysler PT Cruiser is more dynamic to drive. Chrysler PT Cruiser engine produces 41 HP more power than Volvo C30, whereas torque is 60 NM more than Volvo C30. Thanks to more power Chrysler PT Cruiser reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 4.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.2 l/100km | 5.7 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo C30 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chrysler PT Cruiser consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo C30, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chrysler PT Cruiser could require 270 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chrysler PT Cruiser consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo C30. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 57 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 850 km in combined cycle | 1120 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km with real consumption | 960 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo C30 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.29 m | 4.25 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.60 m | 1.45 m | |
| Chrysler PT Cruiser is 4 cm longer than the Volvo C30, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Chrysler PT Cruiser is 15 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 538 litres | 251 litres | |
|
Chrysler PT Cruiser has more luggage capacity. Chrysler PT Cruiser has 287 litres more trunk space than the Volvo C30. | |||
| 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 Volvo C30, which means Chrysler PT Cruiser can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`000 | 1`780 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Volvo C30 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chrysler PT Cruiser has serious deffects in 135 percent more cases than Volvo C30, so Volvo C30 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 2800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler PT Cruiser has
|
Volvo C30 has
| |