2005 Chrysler Crossfire vs. 2012 Toyota Tundra
To start off, 2012 Toyota Tundra is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Chrysler Crossfire. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Chrysler Crossfire would be higher. At 4,664 cc (8 cylinders), 2012 Toyota Tundra is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Chrysler Crossfire (340 HP @ 6100 RPM) has 64 more horse power than 2012 Toyota Tundra. (276 HP @ 5400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Chrysler Crossfire should accelerate faster than 2012 Toyota Tundra. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Chrysler Crossfire weights approximately 430 kg more than 2012 Toyota Tundra. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2012 Toyota Tundra is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2005 Chrysler Crossfire. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Toyota Tundra will offer significantly more control. 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 Toyota Tundra (424 Nm) has 4 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Chrysler Crossfire. (420 Nm). This means 2012 Toyota Tundra will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Chrysler Crossfire.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Chrysler Crossfire | 2012 Toyota Tundra | |
| Make | Chrysler | Toyota |
| Model | Crossfire | Tundra |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3195 cc | 4664 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 3 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 340 HP | 276 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6100 RPM | 5400 RPM |
| Torque | 420 Nm | 424 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.0:1 | 9.8:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 3 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1510 kg | 1080 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4070 mm | 5340 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 2040 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1940 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2410 mm | 3230 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.4 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 18.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 60 L | 100 L |
