2009 Chrysler PT Dream Cruiser vs. 2006 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2009 Chrysler PT Dream Cruiser is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Ford Mustang. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Ford Mustang would be higher. At 4,606 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Ford Mustang is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 2006 Ford Mustang 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 2006 Ford Mustang. 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, 2006 Ford Mustang (868 Nm) has 658 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Chrysler PT Dream Cruiser. (210 Nm). This means 2006 Ford Mustang will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Chrysler PT Dream Cruiser. 2009 Chrysler PT Dream Cruiser has automatic transmission and 2006 Ford Mustang has manual transmission. 2006 Ford Mustang will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Chrysler PT Dream Cruiser will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Chrysler PT Dream Cruiser | 2006 Ford Mustang | |
Make | Chrysler | Ford |
Model | PT Dream Cruiser | Mustang |
Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2397 cc | 4606 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 178 HP | 0 HP |
Torque | 210 Nm | 868 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Width | 2000 mm | 1880 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.8 L/100km | 9.4 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 13.1 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |