2006 Dodge Charger vs. 2005 Ford Taurus
To start off, 2006 Dodge Charger is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Ford Taurus. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Ford Taurus would be higher. At 3,522 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Dodge Charger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Dodge Charger (250 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 97 more horse power than 2005 Ford Taurus. (153 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Dodge Charger should accelerate faster than 2005 Ford Taurus. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Dodge Charger weights approximately 1068 kg more than 2005 Ford Taurus. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2006 Dodge Charger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2005 Ford Taurus. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Dodge Charger 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, 2006 Dodge Charger (339 Nm) has 88 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Ford Taurus. (251 Nm). This means 2006 Dodge Charger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Ford Taurus.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Dodge Charger | 2005 Ford Taurus | |
| Make | Dodge | Ford |
| Model | Charger | Taurus |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2005 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3522 cc | 2983 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 250 HP | 153 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 339 Nm | 251 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 96 mm | 89 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 81 mm | 79 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.6:1 | 9.7:1 |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 6 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2343 kg | 1275 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5090 mm | 5030 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1860 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3050 mm | 2650 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 8.7 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 12.4 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.7 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 68 L |
