2009 Dodge Charger vs. 2011 Nissan Frontier
To start off, 2011 Nissan Frontier is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 Dodge Charger. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 Dodge Charger would be higher. At 3,953 cc (8 cylinders), 2011 Nissan Frontier is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2011 Nissan Frontier (257 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 7 more horse power than 2009 Dodge Charger. (250 HP @ 6400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2011 Nissan Frontier should accelerate faster than 2009 Dodge Charger.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front 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, 2009 Dodge Charger (339 Nm @ 3800 RPM) has 58 more torque (in Nm) than 2011 Nissan Frontier. (281 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2009 Dodge Charger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2011 Nissan Frontier. 2009 Dodge Charger has automatic transmission and 2011 Nissan Frontier has manual transmission. 2011 Nissan Frontier will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Dodge Charger will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Dodge Charger | 2011 Nissan Frontier | |
| Make | Dodge | Nissan |
| Model | Charger | Frontier |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2011 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3518 cc | 3953 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 3 valves |
| Horse Power | 250 HP | 257 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 5600 RPM |
| Torque | 339 Nm | 281 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3800 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.7:1 | 9.7:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1860 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.4 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
