2009 Cadillac SRX vs. 2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser
To start off, 2009 Cadillac SRX is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser would be higher. At 3,564 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Cadillac SRX is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Cadillac SRX (252 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 32 more horse power than 2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser. (220 HP @ 6400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Cadillac SRX should accelerate faster than 2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser.
Because 2009 Cadillac SRX 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 2009 Cadillac SRX. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser, 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, 2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser (320 Nm) has 66 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Cadillac SRX. (254 Nm). This means 2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Cadillac SRX.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Cadillac SRX | 2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser | |
Make | Cadillac | Chrysler |
Model | SRX | PT Cruiser |
Year Released | 2009 | 2005 |
Body Type | SUV | Convertible |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3564 cc | 2425 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 252 HP | 220 HP |
Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 6400 RPM |
Torque | 254 Nm | 320 Nm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.2:1 | 8.1:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1710 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.7 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 15.7 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |