2001 Renault Vel Satis vs. 2009 Chrysler PT Cruiser
To start off, 2009 Chrysler PT Cruiser is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2001 Renault Vel Satis. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2001 Renault Vel Satis would be higher. Both 2001 Renault Vel Satis and 2009 Chrysler PT Cruiser are equipped with a 1,996 cc engine. In terms of performance, 2001 Renault Vel Satis (163 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 24 more horse power than 2009 Chrysler PT Cruiser. (139 HP @ 5700 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2001 Renault Vel Satis should accelerate faster than 2009 Chrysler PT Cruiser. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2001 Renault Vel Satis weights approximately 215 kg more than 2009 Chrysler PT Cruiser. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. 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, 2001 Renault Vel Satis (250 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 61 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Chrysler PT Cruiser. (189 Nm @ 4150 RPM). This means 2001 Renault Vel Satis will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Chrysler PT Cruiser. 2009 Chrysler PT Cruiser has automatic transmission and 2001 Renault Vel Satis has manual transmission. 2001 Renault Vel Satis will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Chrysler PT Cruiser will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2001 Renault Vel Satis | 2009 Chrysler PT Cruiser | |
| Make | Renault | Chrysler |
| Model | Vel Satis | PT Cruiser |
| Year Released | 2001 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1996 cc | 1996 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 163 HP | 139 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 5700 RPM |
| Torque | 250 Nm | 189 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 4150 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 82.7 mm | 87.5 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 93 mm | 83 mm |
| Top Speed | 210 km/hour | 190 km/hour |
| Acceleration 0-100mph | 9.6 seconds | 9.7 seconds |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1640 kg | 1425 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4290 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1870 mm | 1710 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1580 mm | 1610 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2870 mm | 2620 mm |
| Fuel Consumption City | 12.6 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 9.4 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 80 L | 57 L |
