2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept vs. 1996 Toyota Previa
To start off, 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept is newer by 11 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Toyota Previa. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Toyota Previa would be higher. At 3,522 cc (8 cylinders), 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept (791 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 659 more horse power than 1996 Toyota Previa. (132 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept should accelerate faster than 1996 Toyota Previa.
Because 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept 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 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Toyota Previa, 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, 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept (800 Nm @ 5000 RPM) has 594 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Toyota Previa. (206 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Toyota Previa.
Compare all specifications:
| 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept | 1996 Toyota Previa | |
| Make | Dodge | Toyota |
| Model | Charger RT Concept | Previa |
| Year Released | 2007 | 1996 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Minivan |
| Engine Position | Front | Middle |
| Engine Size | 3522 cc | 2438 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 791 HP | 132 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Torque | 800 Nm | 206 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.6:1 | 9.3:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 8 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.2 L/100km | 8.2 L/100km |
