2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept vs. 2003 Smart Roadster
To start off, 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Smart Roadster. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Smart Roadster 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 691 more horse power than 2003 Smart Roadster. (100 HP @ 5250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept should accelerate faster than 2003 Smart Roadster.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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 670 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Smart Roadster. (130 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Smart Roadster.
Compare all specifications:
| 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept | 2003 Smart Roadster | |
| Make | Dodge | Smart |
| Model | Charger RT Concept | Roadster |
| Year Released | 2007 | 2003 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Rear |
| Engine Size | 3522 cc | 698 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 791 HP | 100 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 5250 RPM |
| Torque | 800 Nm | 130 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5000 RPM | 2500 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.6:1 | 9.0:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Top Speed | 260 km/hour | 190 km/hour |
| Acceleration 0-100mph | 6 seconds | 9.8 seconds |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.2 L/100km | 5.3 L/100km |
