2006 Chrysler Voyager vs. 2000 Ford Artic
To start off, 2006 Chrysler Voyager is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Ford Artic. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Ford Artic would be higher. At 3,998 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Ford Artic is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Chrysler Voyager (145 HP) has 17 more horse power than 2000 Ford Artic. (128 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Chrysler Voyager should accelerate faster than 2000 Ford Artic.
Because 2000 Ford Artic 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 2000 Ford Artic. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Chrysler Voyager, 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. 2000 Ford Artic has automatic transmission and 2006 Chrysler Voyager has manual transmission. 2006 Chrysler Voyager will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2000 Ford Artic will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Chrysler Voyager | 2000 Ford Artic | |
| Make | Chrysler | Ford |
| Model | Voyager | Artic |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2429 cc | 3998 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 145 HP | 128 HP |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 7 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4850 mm | 5240 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2000 mm | 1830 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1790 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3050 mm | 3200 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 68 L |
