2009 Dodge Charger vs. 2006 Maserati Quattroporte
To start off, 2009 Dodge Charger is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Maserati Quattroporte. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Maserati Quattroporte would be higher. At 5,654 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Dodge Charger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Maserati Quattroporte (395 HP @ 7250 RPM) has 27 more horse power than 2009 Dodge Charger. (368 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Maserati Quattroporte should accelerate faster than 2009 Dodge Charger.
Because 2009 Dodge Charger is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Maserati Quattroporte. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Dodge Charger 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 Dodge Charger (536 Nm @ 4250 RPM) has 94 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Maserati Quattroporte. (442 Nm @ 4750 RPM). This means 2009 Dodge Charger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Maserati Quattroporte.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Dodge Charger | 2006 Maserati Quattroporte | |
Make | Dodge | Maserati |
Model | Charger | Quattroporte |
Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5654 cc | 4245 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 368 HP | 395 HP |
Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 7250 RPM |
Torque | 536 Nm | 442 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4250 RPM | 4750 RPM |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5090 mm | 5060 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1900 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1440 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3050 mm | 3070 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 10.2 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 19.6 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.1 L/100km | 16.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 72 L | 90 L |