2000 Chrysler ESX 3 vs. 2012 BMW M5
To start off, 2012 BMW M5 is newer by 12 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Chrysler ESX 3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 would be higher. At 4,400 cc (8 cylinders), 2012 BMW M5 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 BMW M5 (560 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 486 more horse power than 2000 Chrysler ESX 3. (74 HP @ 6400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 BMW M5 should accelerate faster than 2000 Chrysler ESX 3.
Because 2012 BMW M5 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 2012 BMW M5. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Chrysler ESX 3, 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, 2012 BMW M5 (680 Nm) has 348 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Chrysler ESX 3. (332 Nm). This means 2012 BMW M5 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Chrysler ESX 3.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 | 2012 BMW M5 | |
| Make | Chrysler | BMW |
| Model | ESX 3 | M5 |
| Year Released | 2000 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1499 cc | 4400 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 74 HP | 560 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 332 Nm | 680 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 7-speed automated manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 4910 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1892 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1455 mm |
