Changan CS35 2016 Comfortable vs Duster 1.6L PE (4x2) Comparison
Car Information
/
SUVEngine / Motor
180
161 km/h
4
/
Dimensions
5 Seater
5 Seater
4160
4341 mm
1810
1804 mm
1670
1693 mm
2560
2676 mm
348
414 L
Fuel Economy
13.9
17.2 Km/L
52
50 L
/
17.2 Km/L
Comfort
✓
/
Interior
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Safety
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
Infotainment
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Transmission
Automatic
/
Chassis & Steering
Front Wheel Drive
Front Wheel Drive
Key Spec
1.6 L
1.6 L - 2.0 L
123 BHP
105 BHP - 135 BHP
Automatic
Automatic & CVT & Manual
Gasoline
Gasoline & Petrol
TBD
TBD
5 Seater
5 - 5
Exterior
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
Engine
1.6 L
1.6 L
Gasoline
Gasoline
123 BHP
115 BHP
160
156 Nm
Technologies
✓
/
Comparison of configuration highlights
Changan CS35 2016 Comfortable
- Keyless Entry
- Parking Sensors - Front and Rear
- EBD (Electronic Brakeforce Distribution)
- ABS
Duster 1.6L PE (4x2)
- ABS
Review Comparison
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Related comparisons
Editor's PickChangan CS35 2016 Comfortable
Expert / Editor Recommendation
Choose Changan CS35 2016 Comfortable if you care more about price; choose Duster 1.6L PE (4x2) if you care more about fuel economy.
Popular Car Comparisons
Q&A
- According to fuel consumption data, Changan CS35 2016 Comfortable has a fuel consumption of 7.19, while Duster 1.6L PE (4x2) has a fuel consumption of 5.81. Therefore, Duster 1.6L PE (4x2) is more fuel-efficient.
- In terms of interior space, Changan CS35 2016 Comfortable has a wheelbase of 2560, while Duster 1.6L PE (4x2) has a wheelbase of 2676 mm. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, Duster 1.6L PE (4x2), offers more room.
- Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. Changan CS35 2016 Comfortable uses Front Wheel Drive, while Duster 1.6L PE (4x2) uses Front Wheel Drive.