2005 Chrysler 300 vs. 2012 Ford Falcon
To start off, 2012 Ford Falcon is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Chrysler 300. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Chrysler 300 would be higher. At 3,983 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 Ford Falcon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Ford Falcon (261 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 11 more horse power than 2005 Chrysler 300. (250 HP @ 6400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Ford Falcon should accelerate faster than 2005 Chrysler 300. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Chrysler 300 weights approximately 5 kg more than 2012 Ford Falcon.
Let's talk about torque, 2012 Ford Falcon (391 Nm) has 51 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Chrysler 300. (340 Nm). This means 2012 Ford Falcon will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Chrysler 300.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Chrysler 300 | 2012 Ford Falcon | |
Make | Chrysler | Ford |
Model | 300 | Falcon |
Year Released | 2005 | 2012 |
Body Type | Station Wagon | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3516 cc | 3983 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 250 HP | 261 HP |
Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 340 Nm | 391 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 96 mm | 92.3 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 81 mm | 99.3 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.9:1 | 10.3:1 |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1709 kg | 1704 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5010 mm | 4967 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1868 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1490 mm | 1433 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3050 mm | 2838 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 8.7 L/100km | 7.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 12.4 L/100km | 13 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.7 L/100km | 9.9 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 68 L |