2009 Chrysler PT Dream Cruiser vs. 2005 Lincoln Town Car
To start off, 2009 Chrysler PT Dream Cruiser is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Lincoln Town Car. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Lincoln Town Car would be higher. At 4,603 cc (8 cylinders), 2005 Lincoln Town Car is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Lincoln Town Car (239 HP) has 61 more horse power than 2009 Chrysler PT Dream Cruiser. (178 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Lincoln Town Car should accelerate faster than 2009 Chrysler PT Dream Cruiser.
Because 2005 Lincoln Town Car 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 2005 Lincoln Town Car. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Chrysler PT Dream 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 Lincoln Town Car (389 Nm) has 179 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Chrysler PT Dream Cruiser. (210 Nm). This means 2005 Lincoln Town Car will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Chrysler PT Dream Cruiser.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Chrysler PT Dream Cruiser | 2005 Lincoln Town Car | |
| Make | Chrysler | Lincoln |
| Model | PT Dream Cruiser | Town Car |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2005 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2397 cc | 4603 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 178 HP | 239 HP |
| Torque | 210 Nm | 389 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 6 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 2000 mm | 1990 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.8 L/100km | 9.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.1 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
