2006 Chevrolet Colorado vs. 2013 Rolls-Royce Phantom
To start off, 2013 Rolls-Royce Phantom is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Chevrolet Colorado. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Chevrolet Colorado would be higher. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Rolls-Royce Phantom weights approximately 920 kg more than 2006 Chevrolet Colorado.
Because 2006 Chevrolet Colorado is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2013 Rolls-Royce Phantom. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Chevrolet Colorado 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, 2013 Rolls-Royce Phantom (720 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 469 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Chevrolet Colorado. (251 Nm @ 2800 RPM). This means 2013 Rolls-Royce Phantom will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Chevrolet Colorado.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Chevrolet Colorado | 2013 Rolls-Royce Phantom | |
Make | Chevrolet | Rolls-Royce |
Model | Colorado | Phantom |
Year Released | 2006 | 2013 |
Body Type | Pickup | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 176 HP | 0 HP |
Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 5350 RPM |
Torque | 251 Nm | 720 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 3500 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 93 mm | 92 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 102 mm | 84 mm |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1750 kg | 2670 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5270 mm | 6092 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1990 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1650 mm | 1640 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3210 mm | 3820 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 8.7 L/100km | 10.3 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 11.8 L/100km | 16.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 74 L | 100 L |