2004 Chrysler PT Cruiser vs. 2005 Ford E-150
To start off, 2005 Ford E-150 is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Chrysler PT Cruiser. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Chrysler PT Cruiser would be higher. At 4,605 cc (8 cylinders), 2005 Ford E-150 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Ford E-150 (225 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 45 more horse power than 2004 Chrysler PT Cruiser. (180 HP @ 6400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Ford E-150 should accelerate faster than 2004 Chrysler PT Cruiser. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Ford E-150 weights approximately 976 kg more than 2004 Chrysler PT Cruiser. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2005 Ford E-150 (373 Nm) has 88 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Chrysler PT Cruiser. (285 Nm). This means 2005 Ford E-150 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Chrysler PT Cruiser.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Chrysler PT Cruiser | 2005 Ford E-150 | |
| Make | Chrysler | Ford |
| Model | PT Cruiser | E-150 |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2005 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Van |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2424 cc | 4605 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 180 HP | 225 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 6250 RPM |
| Torque | 285 Nm | 373 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 87 mm | 90 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 101 mm | 90 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 8.1:1 | 9.0:1 |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 8 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 3 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1407 kg | 2383 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4290 mm | 5390 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1790 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1610 mm | 2060 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 3510 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.1 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 12.4 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.2 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 57 L | 132 L |
