2009 Chevrolet HHR vs. 2006 Nissan 350Z
To start off, 2009 Chevrolet HHR is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Nissan 350Z. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Nissan 350Z would be higher. At 3,491 cc, 2006 Nissan 350Z is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Nissan 350Z (300 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 40 more horse power than 2009 Chevrolet HHR. (260 HP @ 5300 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Nissan 350Z should accelerate faster than 2009 Chevrolet HHR.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear 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, both vehicles can yield 353 Nm of torque. So under normal driving conditions, the ability to climb up hills and pull heavy equipment should be relatively similar for both vehicles.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Chevrolet HHR | 2006 Nissan 350Z | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Nissan |
| Model | HHR | 350Z |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1997 cc | 3491 cc |
| Horse Power | 260 HP | 300 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5300 RPM | 6400 RPM |
| Torque | 353 Nm | 353 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 4800 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4480 mm | 4320 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1820 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1610 mm | 1330 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2640 mm | 2660 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 8.1 L/100km | 9.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 11.2 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 9.8 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 76 L |
