Last Update: May. 19, 2019, 5:11 a.m.
Sizes and Dimensions
Parts & Accessories
Home >>> >>> Chevrolet Epica and Chrysler PT Cruiser

What is Better Chevrolet Epica or Chrysler PT Cruiser?

Exterior

Chevrolet Epica Chrysler PT Cruiser

14 reasons to buy Chevrolet Epica

Engine and transmission
Better compression 17.5 vs 9.5 46% or 8 . The greater degree of compression = the less fuel need to produce the same power.
More engine power

150 bhp vs 141 bhp

110 kw. vs 105 kw.

6% or 9 bhp. More power of car = more top speed.
More torque 320 nM vs 214 nM 33% or 106 nM. More torque = faster acceleration.
Performance
Faster acceleration from 0 to 60 mph 9.7 sec. vs 10.6 sec. 0.9 sec.
More top speed 124 mph vs 121 mph 3 mph
Emissions
Less CO2 emissions 105 g/mile vs 139 g/mile 32% or 34 g/mile
Weight and capacity
More minimum boot capacity 480 liters vs 249 liters 48% or 231 liters
More capacity of fuel tank 65 liters vs 57 liters 12% or 8 liters
More maximum allowable weight 2045 kg vs 1890 kg 8% or 155 kg
More maximum bearing capacity 485 kg vs 285 kg 41% or 200 kg
More maximum towing weight with brakes 1200 kg vs 1000 kg 17% or 200 kg
Other specs
Less weight 1560 kg vs 1605 kg 3% or 45 kg Weight of the vehicle affects: fuel consumption, acceleration dynamic, braking distance, etc.
Less turning radius 10.8 meters vs 12 meters 11% or 1.2 meters
More seats 5 vs 4 1

5 reasons to buy Chrysler PT Cruiser

Engine and transmission
Piston diameter larger 87.5 mm vs 83 mm 5% or 4.5 mm larger. The larger diameter of cylinder = the greater filling ratio. Cons: increase emissions of toxic substances.
Piston stroke longer 101 mm vs 92 mm 9% or 9 mm. The longer stroke = lower fuel consumption and fewer emissions.
Fuel consumption
Less fuel consumption (Combined cycle) 30.1 mpg vs 46.27 mpg 54% or 16.17 mpg
Less fuel consumption (Highway) 38.69 mpg vs 53.27 mpg 38% or 14.58 mpg
Less fuel consumption (City) 21.69 mpg vs 37.7 mpg 74% or 16.01 mpg

Neutral reasons Chevrolet Epica vs. Chrysler PT Cruiser

Engine and transmission
Engine speed (RPM) 4000 RPM vs 5200 RPM 23% or 1200 less rpms.
Engine capacity 1991 cm3 vs 2429 cm3 18% or 438 cm3 less
Engine position Front transverse vs Front transverse
Cylinders location In line vs In line
Camshaft SOHC vs DOHC
Fuel supply COMMON RAIL vs Distributor fuel injection
Turbocharging Yes vs Yes
Dimensions
Length 4805 mm vs 4288 mm 11% or 517 mm shorter
Width 1810 mm vs 1748 mm 3% or 62 mm wider
Height 1450 mm vs 1539 mm 6% or 89 mm lower
Wheels and tires
Wheelbase 2700 mm vs 2616 mm 3% or 84 mm more
Front tires size 205/60 R16 vs 205/55 R16
Rear tires size 205/60 R16 vs 205/55 R16
Spare wheel Compact vs Compact
Type of wheels 16" alloy wheels vs 16" alloy wheels
*Specs may vary depending on configurations and year of production(taken parameters of last released versions)