2004 Chrysler Sebring vs. 2009 Mazda 5
To start off, 2009 Mazda 5 is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Chrysler Sebring. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Chrysler Sebring would be higher. At 2,972 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Chrysler Sebring is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Chrysler Sebring (200 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 47 more horse power than 2009 Mazda 5. (153 HP @ 6500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Chrysler Sebring should accelerate faster than 2009 Mazda 5.
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, 2004 Chrysler Sebring (279 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 78 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda 5. (201 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2004 Chrysler Sebring will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda 5.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Chrysler Sebring | 2009 Mazda 5 | |
Make | Chrysler | Mazda |
Model | Sebring | 5 |
Year Released | 2004 | 2009 |
Body Type | Coupe | Minivan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2972 cc | 2260 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 200 HP | 153 HP |
Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Torque | 279 Nm | 201 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 6 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4840 mm | 4620 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1760 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1640 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2640 mm | 2760 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 8.1 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 11.8 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.2 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 62 L | 60 L |