2006 Chevrolet HHR vs. 1998 MCC Smart & Pulse City Coupe
To start off, 2006 Chevrolet HHR is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1998 MCC Smart & Pulse City Coupe. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1998 MCC Smart & Pulse City Coupe would be higher. At 2,199 cc (4 cylinders), 2006 Chevrolet HHR is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1998 MCC Smart & Pulse City Coupe is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1998 MCC Smart & Pulse City Coupe. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Chevrolet HHR, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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, 2006 Chevrolet HHR (203 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 123 more torque (in Nm) than 1998 MCC Smart & Pulse City Coupe. (80 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2006 Chevrolet HHR will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1998 MCC Smart & Pulse City Coupe.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Chevrolet HHR | 1998 MCC Smart & Pulse City Coupe | |
| Make | Chevrolet | MCC |
| Model | HHR | Smart & Pulse City Coupe |
| Year Released | 2006 | 1998 |
| Engine Position | Front | Rear |
| Engine Size | 2199 cc | 599 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 53 HP |
| Torque | 203 Nm | 80 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 2000 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 9.5:1 |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4440 mm | 2510 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1740 mm | 1520 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1570 mm | 1560 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2630 mm | 1820 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 22 L |
