2009 Chrysler Aspen vs. 2006 Mazda 3
To start off, 2009 Chrysler Aspen is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Mazda 3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Mazda 3 would be higher. At 5,654 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Chrysler Aspen is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Chrysler Aspen (340 HP @ 5300 RPM) has 190 more horse power than 2006 Mazda 3. (150 HP @ 6500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Chrysler Aspen should accelerate faster than 2006 Mazda 3.
Because 2009 Chrysler Aspen is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Mazda 3. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Chrysler Aspen 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, 2009 Chrysler Aspen (380 Nm @ 4200 RPM) has 197 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda 3. (183 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2009 Chrysler Aspen will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Chrysler Aspen | 2006 Mazda 3 | |
Make | Chrysler | Mazda |
Model | Aspen | 3 |
Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5654 cc | 1999 cc |
Horse Power | 340 HP | 150 HP |
Engine RPM | 5300 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Torque | 380 Nm | 183 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4200 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
Number of Seats | 8 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5140 mm | 4540 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1940 mm | 1760 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1880 mm | 1470 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3030 mm | 2650 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.8 L/100km | 6.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 12.4 L/100km | 8.4 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.3 L/100km | 7.6 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 102 L | 55 L |