2006 Chevrolet HHR vs. 2003 Ford Econoline
To start off, 2006 Chevrolet HHR is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Ford Econoline. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Ford Econoline would be higher. At 4,195 cc (6 cylinders), 2003 Ford Econoline is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Ford Econoline (197 HP @ 4700 RPM) has 54 more horse power than 2006 Chevrolet HHR. (143 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Ford Econoline should accelerate faster than 2006 Chevrolet HHR.
Because 2003 Ford Econoline 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 2003 Ford Econoline. 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, 2003 Ford Econoline (338 Nm @ 2700 RPM) has 135 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Chevrolet HHR. (203 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2003 Ford Econoline will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Chevrolet HHR.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Chevrolet HHR | 2003 Ford Econoline | |
Make | Chevrolet | Ford |
Model | HHR | Econoline |
Year Released | 2006 | 2003 |
Body Type | Hatchback | Van |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2196 cc | 4195 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 143 HP | 197 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4700 RPM |
Torque | 203 Nm | 338 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 2700 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Vehicle Length | 4480 mm | 5390 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 2020 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1610 mm | 2060 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2640 mm | 3510 mm |