1985 Citroen CX vs. 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept
To start off, 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1985 Citroen CX. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1985 Citroen CX would be higher. At 3,522 cc (8 cylinders), 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept (791 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 686 more horse power than 1985 Citroen CX. (105 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept should accelerate faster than 1985 Citroen CX.
Because 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1985 Citroen CX, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept (800 Nm @ 5000 RPM) has 641 more torque (in Nm) than 1985 Citroen CX. (159 Nm @ 3250 RPM). This means 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1985 Citroen CX.
Compare all specifications:
| 1985 Citroen CX | 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept | |
| Make | Citroen | Dodge |
| Model | CX | Charger RT Concept |
| Year Released | 1985 | 2007 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1995 cc | 3522 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 105 HP | 791 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Torque | 159 Nm | 800 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3250 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.0:1 | 9.6:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Top Speed | 170 km/hour | 260 km/hour |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 5.2 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
