Charger 3.6L GT vs 508 1.6T Allure Turbo Comparison
Car Information
Engine / Motor
210 km/h
248 km/h
Dimensions
5 Seater
5 Seater
5040 mm
4830 mm
1905 mm
1853 mm
1479 mm
1456 mm
3052 mm
2793 mm
455 L
487 L
Fuel Economy
9.3 Km/L
14.7 Km/L
70 L
62 L
9.3 Km/L
14.7 Km/L
Comfort
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
/
✓
Interior
✓
✓
Safety
✓
✓
Chassis & Steering
Rear Wheel Drive
Front Wheel Drive
Key Spec
3.6 L - 6.4 L
1.6 L - 1598 L
292 BHP - 797 BHP
156 BHP - 225 BHP
Automatic
Automatic
Gasoline & Petrol
Gasoline & Petrol
TBD
TBD
5 Seater
5 Seater
Exterior
✓
✓
/
✓
Engine
3.6 L
1.6 L
Gasoline
Gasoline
300 BHP
217 BHP
358 Nm
300 Nm
Technologies
✓
/
Comparison of configuration highlights
Charger 3.6L GT
- Parking sensor rear
- Parking sensor front
- Rear Camera
- ABS
508 1.6T Allure Turbo
- 360 Degree camera
- Parking sensor rear
- Parking sensor front
- ABS
Review Comparison
Positive
- Amazing power and acceleration
- Unique American muscular design
- Pleasant driving experience and excellent control
Negative
- High fuel consumption
- The quality of interior materials is average
- Suspension comfort is not ideal
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Related comparisons
Editor's PickCharger 3.6L GT
Expert / Editor Recommendation
Choose Charger 3.6L GT if you care more about price; choose 508 1.6T Allure Turbo if you care more about fuel economy.
Popular Car Comparisons
Q&A
- According to fuel consumption data, Charger 3.6L GT has a fuel consumption of 10.75, while 508 1.6T Allure Turbo has a fuel consumption of 6.8. Therefore, 508 1.6T Allure Turbo is more fuel-efficient.
- In terms of interior space, Charger 3.6L GT has a wheelbase of 3052 mm, while 508 1.6T Allure Turbo has a wheelbase of 2793 mm. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, Charger 3.6L GT, offers more room.
- Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. Charger 3.6L GT uses Rear Wheel Drive, while 508 1.6T Allure Turbo uses Front Wheel Drive.