2005 Chrysler Crossfire vs. 2013 Mini Countryman
To start off, 2013 Mini Countryman is newer by 8 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. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Mini Countryman weights approximately 66 kg more than 2005 Chrysler Crossfire.
Because 2013 Mini Countryman is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2005 Chrysler Crossfire. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Mini Countryman 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, 2005 Chrysler Crossfire (310 Nm) has 70 more torque (in Nm) than 2013 Mini Countryman. (240 Nm). This means 2005 Chrysler Crossfire will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2013 Mini Countryman.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Chrysler Crossfire | 2013 Mini Countryman | |
Make | Chrysler | Mini |
Model | Crossfire | Countryman |
Year Released | 2005 | 2013 |
Body Type | Coupe | Crossover |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 215 HP | 0 HP |
Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 310 Nm | 240 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 90 mm | 77 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 84 mm | 85 mm |
Drive Type | Rear | AWD |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1392 kg | 1458 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4070 mm | 4110 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1996 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1310 mm | 1561 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2410 mm | 2595 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.4 L/100km | 6.3 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 8.1 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 60 L | 47 L |